Re: OSPF LSA type 3 filtering

Dear Narbik and Brian,

I am really surprised to see such a long conversation
on subject "OSPF LSA type 3 filtering". Especially, Narbik and Brian your
instructor of CCIE since last 10 years (if I am not wrong) and the most expert
engineers of Cisco protocols/devices in the industry, and still there are lot
to be discovered even in OSPF.
Its an amazing news for me.

Thanks,
Nadeem
Anjum

>________________________________
> From: Narbik Kocharians
<narbikk_at_gmail.com>
>To: rakesh madupu <raaki.88_at_gmail.com>
>Cc: Marko
Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>; Imran Ali <immrccie_at_gmail.com>; Joseph L.
Brunner <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>; Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>;
Brian McGahan <bmcgahan_at_ine.com>; Cisco certification <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Saturday, January 5, 2013 1:32 AM
>Subject: Re: OSPF LSA type 3
filtering
>
>Read this gr8 article:
>http://routingfreak.wordpress.com/2011/03/05/why-providers-still-prefer-is-i
s-over-ospf-when-designing-large-flat-topologies/
>
>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
>>>
>>>
Received on Sat Jan 05 2013 - 03:51:27 ART