OSPF vs IS-IS

William Cooper wcooper02 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 11 08:29:02 CDT 2011


I'm totally in concurrence with Stephan's point.

Couple of things to consider: a) deciding to migrate to either ISIS or
OSPFv3 from another protocol is still migrating to a new protocol
and b) even in the case of migrating to OSPFv3, there are fairly
significant changes in behavior from OSPFv2 to be aware of (most
notably
authentication, but that's fodder for another conversation).

-Tony

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Stefan Fouant
<sfouant at shortestpathfirst.net> wrote:
> Well up until not too long ago, to support IPv6 you would run OSPFv3 and for IPv4 you would run OSPFv2, making IS-IS more attractive, but that is no longer the case with support for IPv4 NLRI in OSPFv3.
>
> 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.
>
> 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 8:57 AM, CJ <cjinfantino at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>> Is there any reason to run IS-IS over OSPF in the SP core? Currently, we
>> are running IS-IS but we are redesigning our core and now would be a good
>> time to switch. I would like to switch to OSPF, mostly because of
>> familiarity with OSPF over IS-IS.
>> What does everyone think?
>>
>> --
>> CJ
>>
>> http://convergingontheedge.com <http://www.convergingontheedge.com>
>
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list