[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

IGP protocol

Subject: IGP protocol
From: lists.nanog at monmotha.net (Brandon Martin)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:52:55 -0500
In-reply-to: <9578293AE169674F9A048B2BC9A081B4030D42FA0F@MUNPRDMBXA1.medline.com>
References: <CAH_tYHKhrwW3hXAig5KpzsDp+TvPwPc6dWdNeukxP=3XDv0qHA@mail.gmail.com> <9578293AE169674F9A048B2BC9A081B4030D42FA0F@MUNPRDMBXA1.medline.com>

On 11/12/18 3:21 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
> 1.  Most large networks (service providers) supporting MPLS will be using ISIS as their IGP.  Some will have islands of OSPF because not everything speaks ISIS.

Notably, support for OSPF is somewhat common on "layer 3 switch" 
products while IS-IS support is significantly less common.

Most "router" products seem to support either.

I was of the impression that there was a draft or similar for 
single-topology (IPv4+IPv6) OSPF.  Did anything ever come of that?
-- 
Brandon Martin

Follow-Ups:
- IGP protocol
  - From: aled.w.morris at googlemail.com (Aled Morris)
- IGP protocol
  - From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)

References:
- IGP protocol
  - From: nanog at netfront.jp (im)
- IGP protocol
  - From: SNaslund at medline.com (Naslund, Steve)

Prev by Date: IGP protocol
Next by Date: IGP protocol
Previous by thread: IGP protocol
Next by thread: IGP protocol
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread