You still have separate tables for IPv4 and IPv6 with isis and multi-topology still runs 2 spf calculations.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:05 PM, <a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > > The differences between the two protocols are so small, that people > > really grasp at straws when 'proving' that one is better over the > > other. 'IS-IS doesn't work over IP, so its more secure'. 'IS-IS uses > > TLVs so new features are quicker to implement'. While these may be > > vaguely valid arguments, they don't hold much water. If you don't > > secure your routers to bad actors forming OSPF adjacencies with you, > > you're doing something wrong.Who is running code that is so bleeding > > edge that feature X might be available for IS-IS, but not OSPF? > > well, bleeding edge fearures in ISIS would also depend on your vendor... > ours seems backwards for ISIS in most of their product line and > we're always wanting more.... heck, I think they've even tried to ensure > its not in > their training courses either...just the briefest of mentions :/ > > as for IGP - ISIS - we moved to it from OSPF because we didnt want > 2 seperate routing calculations and tables being kept for IPv4 and IPv6 and > all routing config is under the one routing protocol. > > alan >