North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
RE: AT&T NYC
- From: Michael Hallgren
- Date: Thu Aug 29 15:36:02 2002
> > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 01:09:54PM -0400, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > > > > Has anybody mentioned the benefits of ISIS as an IGP to them.
> > > > Link-state protocols are evil, and when they break, they *really*
> > > > I still do not see a compeling argument for not using BGP as your
> > >
> > > 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.
What about a well choosen (wrt topo) pair of them...
> 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 <email@example.com> 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)