RIP Justification

Thu Sep 30 18:39:17 UTC 2010

Yes, clearly the next crowd of CCNAs will save the world. You know what they
say about giving CCNAs enable...

-Jack

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Marshall Eubanks <tme at americafree.tv>wrote:

>
> On Sep 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
>
> > Dynamic routing is hard, let's go shopping.
> >
> > Seriously though, I can't think of a topology I've ever encountered where
> > RIP would have made more sense than OSPF or BGP, or if you're really
> > die-hard, IS-IS. Let it die...
>
> But what about all of those students even now working on getting their Lab
> RIP routing to work ?
> Surely such a huge crowd-sourcing will solve any remaining problems with
> the protocol by the end of the term!
>
> Regards
> Marshall
>
> >
> > My $0.02,
> >
> > -Jack
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:53 AM, John Kristoff <jtk at cymru.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:20:48 -0700
> >> Jesse Loggins <jlogginsccie at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> OSPF. It seems that many Network Engineers consider RIP an old
> >>> antiquated protocol that should be thrown in back of a closet "never
> >>> to be seen or heard from again". Some even preferred using a more
> >>> complex protocol like OSPF instead of RIP. I am of the opinion that
> >>
> >> Complexity depending on your perspective.  The implementation might be
> >> more complicated to code, but by and large the major implementations
> >> after years of experience seem to be very stable now.  If the physical
> >> topology and stability is increasingly "interesting", RIP may be a more
> >> complex protocol to use and troubleshoot than OSPF.  In essence,
> >> dealing with loops and topology changes in RIP involves a set of
> >> incomplete and unsatisfactory hacks for more than the simplest of
> >> environments.
> >>
> >>> every protocol has its place, which seems to be contrary to some
> >>> engineers way of thinking. This leads to my question. What are your
> >>> views of when and where the RIP protocol is useful? Please excuse me
> >>> if this is the incorrect forum for such questions.
> >>
> >> As an implementation of distance vector, its at least useful as a
> teaching
> >> tool about routing theory, history and implementations.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>