I'll go with that... And one other thing... Traditionally it has been easier for developers to add new features to IS-IS because of the structure and flexibility of TLVs, whereas OSPF required the design of entirely new LSA types to support similar capabilities... I guess this has become less of an issue over the last few years however...
Nonetheless, if I was building a greenfield network today, I would personally go with IS-IS, but that is largely because of my many years working with the protocol... 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 6:19 PM, Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: >> 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. > > how about simpler and more stable? > > randy
