Yes, clearly the next crowd of CCNAs will save the world. You know what they say about giving CCNAs enable...
-Jack On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Marshall Eubanks <t...@americafree.tv>wrote: > > On Sep 30, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote: > > > Dynamic routing is hard, let's go shopping. > > > > Seriously though, I can't think of a topology I've ever encountered where > > RIP would have made more sense than OSPF or BGP, or if you're really > > die-hard, IS-IS. Let it die... > > But what about all of those students even now working on getting their Lab > RIP routing to work ? > Surely such a huge crowd-sourcing will solve any remaining problems with > the protocol by the end of the term! > > Regards > Marshall > > > > > My $0.02, > > > > -Jack > > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:53 AM, John Kristoff <j...@cymru.com> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:20:48 -0700 > >> Jesse Loggins <jlogginsc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> 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 > >> > >> Complexity depending on your perspective. The implementation might be > >> more complicated to code, but by and large the major implementations > >> after years of experience seem to be very stable now. If the physical > >> topology and stability is increasingly "interesting", RIP may be a more > >> complex protocol to use and troubleshoot than OSPF. In essence, > >> dealing with loops and topology changes in RIP involves a set of > >> incomplete and unsatisfactory hacks for more than the simplest of > >> environments. > >> > >>> 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. > >> > >> As an implementation of distance vector, its at least useful as a > teaching > >> tool about routing theory, history and implementations. > >> > >> John > >> > >> > > > >