RIP Justification

Fred Baker fred at
Wed Sep 29 21:13:18 UTC 2010

On Sep 29, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Jesse Loggins wrote:

> A group of engineers and I were having a design discussion about routing
> protocols including RIP and static routing and the justifications of use for
> each protocol. One very interesting discussion was surrounding RIP and its
> use versus a protocol like 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
> 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.

For RIP, the attraction is simplicity, and the down-side is count-to-infinity. If you have a network in which count-to-infinity is a non-issue - often true of residential networks, for example - the simplicity of RIP can be very attractive.

If you have anything resembling complexity in your network, protocols like OSPF are far more appropriate.

More information about the NANOG mailing list