On Thu, 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> >
Granted, we're not a service provider, so we operate on a different scale here, but one interesting trick that can be done with ISIS (at least on Cisco) is this: router a ----------- router isis advertise passive-only interface loopback0 ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.255 interface vlan2 ip unnumbered loopback0 ip router isis isis network point-to-point router b ----------- (copy router isis definition from router a) interface loopback0 ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.255 (copy vlan2 definition from router a) ----------- This removes the associated headaches with /30s or /31s in having to keep track of their allocation, as well as having them clog the your routing table. -waits for replies stating why this is a bad idea- Now, if I could just get isis-per-vrf-instance support on the Catalyst 6500. Jason
