The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2004-Jan> msg00091



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Re: Re: OSPF and IS IS

  • From: "Piotr Marecki" <piotr.marecki@tdcinternet.pl>
  • Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:54:53 +0100
  • Cc: <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
  • Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:51:55 -0500
  • To: "Jean Philippe Vasseur" <jvasseur@cisco.com>

> >
> >Which is not always true unfortunately .Latest example is diffserv aware
TE
> >implementation
> >introduced in junos 6.2 .Only protocol so far supported to distribute
ds-TE
> >information is OSPF.
> >Bad luck...
>
> Eric's point was just to say that some features may be implemented first
in
> one IGP or another indifferently ... this was just an example
>
>

Lot's of us  tend to think that "bleeding edge" means IS-IS because of it
simplicity and
flexibilility . Honestly OSPF with opaque LSA are flexible enough , and
moreover OSPF
provide more control and granurality when it comes to distribute information
( is-is node has to announce entire
lsp , whether ospf need to announce changed opaque LSA).
Still , i would vote for is-is :)

regards


Piotr Marecki




-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml