Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: OSPF vs IS-IS
From: Stefan Fouant <sfouant () shortestpathfirst net>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:35:48 -0400

I'll go with that... And one other thing... Traditionally it has been easier for developers to add new features to 
IS-IS because of the structure and flexibility of TLVs, whereas OSPF required the design of entirely new LSA types to 
support similar capabilities... I guess this has become less of an issue over the last few years however...

Nonetheless, if I was building a greenfield network today, I would personally go with IS-IS, but that is largely 
because of my many years working with the protocol...

Stefan Fouant
JNCIE-M, JNCIE-ER, JNCIE-SEC, JNCI
Technical Trainer, Juniper Networks
http://www.shortestpathfirst.net
http://www.twitter.com/sfouant

Sent from my iPad

On Aug 11, 2011, at 6:19 PM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:

The only reason in my opinion to run IS-IS rather than OSPF today is
due to the fact that IS-IS is decoupled from IP making it less
vulnerable to attacks.

how about simpler and more stable?

randy


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]