This is also the case in all SPB deployments I'm aware of as well.  The 
simplicity of it makes the most compelling reason for deployment. But it's not 
a "subset" per say, SPB only added a couple of TLVs to IS-IS, it did not remove 
functionality. 

Only the edge nodes where a vlan service, of which 16 million are available, 
needs to provisioned and the core doesn't need to be touched.  I most 
implementations I've seen so far this is a single cli command.  Compared to BGP 
configurations that are required in today's vendors  implementations it's 
difficult to see a equal comparison for a DC operator  

--
Paul Unbehagen


Sent from my iPad

On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Randy Bush <[email protected]> wrote:

>> TRILL and SPB use IS-IS internally ... but only a reasonable subset of
>> IS-IS (no NSAPs, no areas) and its intricacies are never exposed to
>> the operator (unless you have to do in-depth troubleshooting).
> 
> is-is used to be simple until the ietf complicators decided it needed to
> compete with ospf in knob and switch count.  most backbone use of is-is
> is still very simple.
> 
> randy
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to