Re: OSPF LSA type 3 filtering

I do like that feature.

I also love the way ISIS handles MTU mismatch which is another big problem we
have in real networks.
You do not just simply ignore it as you do with OSPF.

Paul
Paul Negron
CCIE# 14856
negron.paul_at_gmail.com

On Jan 4, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Yuri Bank <yuribank_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Except that with the IS-IS the hostname is carried in each routers LSP
> (hostname TLV), so there is no dependency on DNS, or manual configuration
> on the routers required (Which is very nice imho).
>
> -Yuri
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Marko Milivojevic
<markom_at_ipexpert.com>wrote:
>
>> You mean the output you'd get if you used "ip ospf name-lookup" ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
>> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM, rakesh madupu <raaki.88_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> For me, I love isis in our customer deployments because it shows
>>> neighboring devices names which is peers with, specially with RR's names
>> ,
>>> life get so much simpler instead of reading an Ip address and
>> associating it
>>> again :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> IS-IS supports multiple routed protocols, i.e. IPv4 and IPv6, whereas
>>>> OSPF doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> Also, in the time when MPLS-TE was emerging as a technology, IS-IS
>>>> behavior to flood unknown TLVs instead of resetting adjacencies when
>>>> it receives them (OSPF does that when it receives an unknown LSA).
>>>> meant a very controlled deployment of new technologies. The fact it's
>>>> not IP, also has some security benefits (cannot be remotely attacked).
>>>> Etc.
>>>>
>>>> What Joseph said is... not quite the reason, since IS-IS also has a
>>>> requirement for a contiguous L2 area.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
>>>> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Imran Ali <immrccie_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> marko i need to know why they use is-is over ospf
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Marko Milivojevic <
>> markom_at_ipexpert.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In reality, for this purpose, IS-IS and OSPF are pretty much the same
>>>>>> (Type 2 vs Pseudonode LSP). They both use a very similar approach to
>>>>>> solve the same calculation problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Carriers tend to use IS-IS for one other reason (to some extent
>>>>>> remedied by OSPFv3). This is a separate discussion though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
>>>>>> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Any Fool can Know The Point is to Understand - Einstein
>>>
>>> www.cciematrix.com
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Fri Jan 04 2013 - 19:14:48 ART