[c-nsp] MPLS TE Autoroute with OSPF and IS-IS?

[Tantsura, Jeff]

I'd add IPv6, as far as I'm aware off there's no production network running
OSPFv3 so the choice is rather limited... 

--
Jeff Tantsura  CCIE# 11416
Senior IP Network Engineer


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Pete Templin
Sent: 17 August 2006 15:18
To: Adam Greene
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE Autoroute with OSPF and IS-IS?

Adam Greene wrote:
> Pete,
> 
> It would be interesting to know as well from a very high-level standpoint
> what's motivated you to switch to IS-IS from OSPF ....

I'm quoting three primary reasons to those who ask:

1:  Security - since ISIS uses CLNS as its transport, and we don't speak 
CLNS to providers or customers, it's much harder to blow up our IGP.
2:  Stability - word on the street says the ISIS coders at Cisco know 
that they're coding the IGP for large service providers, and take less 
risks (but also seem to introduce features earlier).
3:  Safety - we're approaching the time when customers will want to do 
dynamic routing over their MPLS VPNs.  We anticipate the early birds 
will use OSPF, if they don't use BGP, and would greatly prefer that our 
IGP be completely different than that IGP.

pt
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/