IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)

Alex P. Rudnev alex at Relcom.EU.net
Wed Jan 6 11:10:04 UTC 1999

Btw, I doubt anyone pay attention to the IS-IS and OSPF feature 
differences when choose IGP protocol, usially this protocols are treated 
as _EQUAL - IS-IS is more complex to configure, and that's the only real 
difference for real life_, but pay attention to the vendors (CISCO 
realised IS-IS later and this realisation was better than OSPF's, IS-IS 
is not common-vendor protocol, IS-IS allow you to use OSPF for the 
customer's routing and readvertise OSPF into IS-IS, and so on...

On 5 Jan 1999, Tony Li wrote:

> Date: 05 Jan 1999 23:03:50 +0000
> From: Tony Li <tli at juniper.net>
> To: Henk Smit <hsmit at cisco.com>
> Cc: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: Re: IGP Comparison (Summary of Responses)
> hsmit at cisco.com (Henk Smit) writes:
> > > "There were also non-technical considerations.  Many people felt that it was
> > > better that the IETF have complete control over the OSPF protocol design
> > > rather than depend on an ISO committee whose goals, namely to produce a
> > > routing protocol for the OSI protocol stack, were somewhat different."(2)
> > 
> >   This is all history, and should not be a reason for you to pick one
> >  protocol over the other. The IETF has become what OSI was (and even
> >  worse). Right now there are active OSPF *and* IS-IS workgroups. The IETF
> >  can extend IS-IS as much as is needed.
> We should also point out that the IETF is now an OSI liason organization
> and can make contributions to the ISO process.  Further, given the
> technical expertise of the folks working in the IETF, the effective death
> of CLNP, and the fact that a significant proportion of the systems running
> IS-IS are actually doing so to forward IP, any contributions made by the
> IETF will be taken very seriously by ISO.
> Regards,
> Tony Li
> IS-IS WG co-chair

Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 239-10-10, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)

More information about the NANOG mailing list