A path to a destination must be loop free, irrespectively.
So it is not a combination of multiple but rather a list of loop free paths to
a destination where any other metrics are used as tie-breakers.
Another story - how do you get all that state distributed, inter-area cases,
how do you make it
affic 10ms longer to get there.
> >
> > However I would like traffic to take Path 2 by adjusting the OSPF cost.
> >
> >
> > I am looking for a formula that other people are using .p
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Erik
> >
> >
> >
On Saturday, January 25, 2014 08:10:54 AM Graham Beneke
wrote:
> The auto-cost capability in some vendors devices seems to
> have left many people ignoring the link metrics within
> their IGP. From what I recall in the standards -
> bandwidth is one possible link metric but certainly not
> the on
On Friday, January 24, 2014 10:59:19 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
> I wasn’t attempting to promote or discourage use of MPLS.
> I was merely endeavoring to point out that in an MPLS
> world, OSPF costs are not how you want to manage your
> traffic.
Again, only an issue when using RSVP-TE.
I'd recommend
On Friday, January 24, 2014 10:36:48 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
> Of course this all fails miserably if you are using
> anything like MPLS underneath your OSPF.
Specifically, fails miserably if you use RSVP-TE to build
your MPLS backbone.
LDP follows IGP cost (has to be manually enabled in Junos),
The auto-cost capability in some vendors devices seems to have left many
people ignoring the link metrics within their IGP. From what I recall in
the standards - bandwidth is one possible link metric but certainly not
the only one. Network designers are free (and I would encourage to) pick
whatever
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Jeff Tantsura
wrote:
> Eric,
> Issues:
> 1.OSPF (SPF) can only produce a SPT based on cost (metric).
> Anything else would require CSPF rather than SPF.
>
A CSPF based protocol would be a suitable algorithm for adding hard
constraints, instead of preference, such
On Jan 24, 2014, at 12:41 PM, Raymond Burkholder wrote:
>>
>> Some networks I have worked with took the average latency of each link and
>> assigned that (with some constant multiple) as the interface cost.
>>
>> Of course this all fails miserably if you are using anything like MPLS
>> underne
-
From: Erik Sundberg
Date: Friday, January 24, 2014 12:26 PM
To: Randy , "nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: RE: OSPF Costs Formula that include delay.
>I understand OSPF default calculation for cost doesn't include delay. I
>am looking for a formula that I can use to manually set
>
> Some networks I have worked with took the average latency of each link and
> assigned that (with some constant multiple) as the interface cost.
>
> Of course this all fails miserably if you are using anything like MPLS
> underneath your OSPF.
>
But then when using MPLS underneath, then MPLS
that other people are using .p
>
> Thanks
>
> Erik
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Randy [mailto:randy_94...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 9:03 PM
> To: Erik Sundberg; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: OSPF Costs Formula that include delay.
>
sday, January 23, 2014 9:03 PM
To: Erik Sundberg; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OSPF Costs Formula that include delay.
- Original Message -
> From: Erik Sundberg
> To: "nanog@nanog.org"
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 4:47 PM
> Subject: OSPF Costs Formul
- Original Message -
> From: Erik Sundberg
> To: "nanog@nanog.org"
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 4:47 PM
> Subject: OSPF Costs Formula that include delay.
>
> What is everyone using for an OSPF cost formula that factors in a circuits
>
What is everyone using for an OSPF cost formula that factors in a circuits
delay and bandwidth (10M-100G)???
Thanks in advance
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or
previous e-mail messages attached to it may contai
14 matches
Mail list logo
