[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       firewalls-gc
Subject:    Re:  RIP vs. OSPF
From:       pomeranz () netcom ! com (Hal Pomeranz)
Date:       1997-07-02 17:10:58
[Download RAW message or body]

RIP has terrible convergence problems on very meshy networks-- routes
may never stabilize if you lose a critical device.  RIP doesn't support
variable-length subnets either, though I gather this is coming in RIP-2.

On the other hand, OSPF is a _pig_ on core routers in large networks.
There are also interoperability problems still lurking between Cisco
and Bay in my experience.  Is anybody still running mixed-vendor
network fabrics, though?

On Jul 2,  6:13pm, John Schnizlein wrote:
} The best solution for security purposes is to (hard) configure the default
} router into your host computers. Unfortunately, this is not the most robust
} configuration against network failure because it locks the host into a single
} path when multiple (valid) routers may be available.

See also Cisco's HSRP (Hot Standby Routing Protocol) which enables two
routers to back each other up by sharing an IP address (which you then
configure as default on your hosts).  Also IRDP, or whatever they're
calling these days.

Hal Pomeranz, Principal        Deer Run Associates        hal@deer-run.com
      Network Connectivity and Security, Systems Management, Training

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]