North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: AT&T NYC
- From: Richard A Steenbergen
- Date: Thu Aug 29 15:24:24 2002
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 03:07:59PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 01:09:54PM -0400, email@example.com wrote:
> > > > Has anybody mentioned the benefits of ISIS as an IGP to them.
> > > Link-state protocols are evil, and when they break, they *really* break.
> > > I still do not see a compeling argument for not using BGP as your IGP.
> > Slow convergence.
> As well there is the issues of running a full iBGP mesh. I've actually
> been doing it, and now that I'm about to add my 5th router, OSPF is
> looking a lot better than configuring 4 more BGP sessions. I've heard
> some people recommend a route-reflector, but that would mean if the
> route-reflector goes down you're screwed.
Planning on doing away with that pesky IBGP mesh and just redistributing
BGP into OSPF are we Ralph?
There is so much wrong with the above post that I can't do anything
except hang my head in shame for people running networks everywhere
around the world.
Richard A Steenbergen <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)