Hi all,
We are in the middle of building out a new ATM network for the Core and on
the outside we are going to be running about 80 3640 or 2600. We are in a
big debate about the routing protocol, we are currently EIGRP.
I have collected lots of info off Cisco's Web site about the two but wan
IMHO, EIGRP is the better of the two. But it's also IMHO that one should
never stray from the standards. If you know without a doubt that no matter
what happens, you will stay a cisco shop, then eigrp offers more
functionallity. Remember also cisco suggests 50 routers in one area, so
proper pla
EIGRP- easy to implement, less CPU/memory intensive than OSPF but
proprietary.
OSPF- Takes more thought, can be more CPU/memory intensive, standard.
If you running a hub and spoke environment and don't mind proprietary
protocol I would run EIGRP. Only allow default to the remotes. Real
sim
Rob,
Few questions. What routed protocols you plan to run? Just IP or
IP/IPX/AT,etc.? Any other vendor equipment other than cisco? Firewalls
running OSPF for failover? Why did you initially choose EIGRP? Does the
network design lend itself well to a backbone area? Redundant links
(including
Perhaps an out of the box thought, but are you running ATM just as a
convenient fast technology, or for circuit orientation/QoS? If the
latter, consider that traffic engineering extensions are being
designed for OSPF and ISIS, but I haven't seen much Cisco work on TE
for EIGRP.
The 50 router
I hear that argument a lot, "if you never plan to use another
vendor...". It's really quite specious as it's not at all difficult to
cutover from routing EIGRP to OSPF or vis versa if the need arises.
Not only are Cisco's multi protocol, they are multi routing protocol
routers. To convert si
>I hear that argument a lot, "if you never plan to use another
>vendor...". It's really quite specious as it's not at all difficult to
>cutover from routing EIGRP to OSPF or vis versa if the need arises.
>
> Not only are Cisco's multi protocol, they are multi routing protocol
>routers. To conv
"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
> >I hear that argument a lot, "if you never plan to use another
> >vendor...". It's really quite specious as it's not at all difficult to
> >cutover from routing EIGRP to OSPF or vis versa if the need arises.
> >
> > Not only are Cisco's multi protocol, they are m
>"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
>
>> >I hear that argument a lot, "if you never plan to use another
>> >vendor...". It's really quite specious as it's not at all difficult to
>> >cutover from routing EIGRP to OSPF or vis versa if the need arises.
>> >
>> > Not only are Cisco's multi protocol
Dave,
when you said "multi IP routing protocols" does it mean a router runs RIP,
EIGRP, OSPF/BGP within 1 or more interfaces?
TIA.
BL Tan
>From: "MADMAN"
>Reply-To: "MADMAN"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
>Date:
"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
> > I think you may have misunderstood my statement and I probably
> >wasn't exactly clear
> >but when I said "multi routing protocol routers" I meant multi IP
> >routing protocols:)
>
> Still confused...are you saying a single IP router can run different
> routing
Yes
dave
Ben Liang Tan wrote:
>
> Dave,
> when you said "multi IP routing protocols" does it mean a router runs RIP,
> EIGRP, OSPF/BGP within 1 or more interfaces?
> TIA.
>
> BL Tan
>
> >From: "MADMAN"
> >Reply-To: "MADMAN&quo
>"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
>
>> > I think you may have misunderstood my statement and I probably
>> >wasn't exactly clear
>> >but when I said "multi routing protocol routers" I meant multi IP
>> >routing protocols:)
>>
>> Still confused...are you saying a single IP router can run differe
3:44
PM
Please respond to "Howard C. Berkowitz"
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:(bcc: Kevin Cullimore)
Subject: Re: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
>I hear that argument a lot, "if you never plan to use another
>vendor...". It's really quite spe
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
> He observed "to build big networks, you have to have clue what you
are
> doing."
>
> Then, he burped. Man does not own beer; man only leases it.
>
> "But, EIGRP allows you
I second that. We have been on a 2 year 3 boss mission to ditch IPX for 300
servers!!!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966
Malcolm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
Rob,
Few questions. What routed protocols you plan to run? Just IP or
IP/IPX/AT,etc.? Any other vendor equipment other than cisco? Firewalls
running OSPF for
s your
networking Team have sufficient experience with OSPF? They already
know, or are at least familiar with EIGRP); don't let it become about
religion. ;)
Alan~
- Original Message -
From: "Mears, Rob"
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: OSPF or EIGRP [
Behalf Of
Mears, Rob
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
Hi all,
We are in the middle of building out a new ATM network for the Core and on
the outside we are going to be running about 80 3640 or 2600. We are in a
big debate about the
,MCNS,CCIE(Write)
http://www.sureshhomepage.com
>From: "Angel Leiva"
>Reply-To: "Angel Leiva"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
>Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 22:03:14 -0500
>
>Rob,
>
>If your network environment is IP based, an
#x27;t let it become about
religion. ;)
Alan~
- Original Message -
From: "Mears, Rob"
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: OSPF or EIGRP [7:28966]
> Hi All,
>
> To your question; we are, as all should be, a pure IP and Cisco shop
(:.
> As to why
the same name.
In Europe, perhaps there is a greater awareness of IS-IS in non-ISP
environments, but in here in the US, it continues to languish for the
most part as "The Undiscovered Protocol."
Alan~
- Original Message -
From: "John Neiberger"
To: ;
Sent: Thur
22 matches
Mail list logo
