Awesome, I was thinking the same thing. Most experience is OSPF so it only makes sense.
That is a good tip about OSPFv3 too. I will have to look more deeply into OSPFv3. Thanks, -CJ On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:34 AM, jim deleskie <deles...@gmail.com> wrote: > Having run both on some good sized networks, I can tell you to run > what your ops folks know best. We can debate all day the technical > merits of one v another, but end of day, it always comes down to your > most jr ops eng having to make a change at 2 am, you need to design > for this case, if your using OSPF today and they know OSPF I'd say > stick with it to reduce the chance of things blowing up at 2am when > someone tries to 'fix' something else. > > -jim > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM, William Cooper <wcoope...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I'm totally in concurrence with Stephan's point. > > > > Couple of things to consider: a) deciding to migrate to either ISIS or > > OSPFv3 from another protocol is still migrating to a new protocol > > and b) even in the case of migrating to OSPFv3, there are fairly > > significant changes in behavior from OSPFv2 to be aware of (most > > notably > > authentication, but that's fodder for another conversation). > > > > -Tony > > > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Stefan Fouant > > <sfou...@shortestpathfirst.net> wrote: > >> Well up until not too long ago, to support IPv6 you would run OSPFv3 and > for IPv4 you would run OSPFv2, making IS-IS more attractive, but that is no > longer the case with support for IPv4 NLRI in OSPFv3. > >> > >> The only reason in my opinion to run IS-IS rather than OSPF today is due > to the fact that IS-IS is decoupled from IP making it less vulnerable to > attacks. > >> > >> Stefan Fouant > >> JNCIE-M, JNCIE-ER, JNCIE-SEC, JNCI > >> Technical Trainer, Juniper Networks > >> http://www.shortestpathfirst.net > >> http://www.twitter.com/sfouant > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >> On Aug 11, 2011, at 8:57 AM, CJ <cjinfant...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hey all, > >>> Is there any reason to run IS-IS over OSPF in the SP core? Currently, > we > >>> are running IS-IS but we are redesigning our core and now would be a > good > >>> time to switch. I would like to switch to OSPF, mostly because of > >>> familiarity with OSPF over IS-IS. > >>> What does everyone think? > >>> > >>> -- > >>> CJ > >>> > >>> http://convergingontheedge.com <http://www.convergingontheedge.com> > >> > >> > > > > > -- CJ http://convergingontheedge.com <http://www.convergingontheedge.com>
