[c-nsp] RIP offset lists - David Barak - net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp

10 messages in net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp[c-nsp] RIP offset lists

From	Sent On	Attachments
Joe Maimon	Jan 20, 2005 7:05 am
Rodney Dunn	Jan 20, 2005 9:21 am
David Barak	Jan 20, 2005 10:22 am
Joe Maimon	Jan 20, 2005 10:58 am
Joe Maimon	Jan 20, 2005 11:01 am
Rodney Dunn	Jan 20, 2005 11:26 am
David Barak	Jan 20, 2005 11:46 am
Joe Maimon	Jan 20, 2005 2:16 pm
Joe Maimon	Jan 20, 2005 2:21 pm
Hudson Delbert J Contr 61 CS/SCBN	Jan 20, 2005 3:29 pm

	Permalink for this message Paste this link in email or IM:
	Permalink for this thread Paste this link in email or IM:
	Atom feed for this thread Paste this URL into your reader:

Subject:	[c-nsp] RIP offset lists	Actions...
From:	David Barak (theg...@yahoo.com)
Date:	Jan 20, 2005 10:22:25 am
List:	net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp

--- Joe Maimon <jmaimon at ttec.com> wrote:

My primary question before delving into solving the mysteries is this: are you running RIP between your provider network and the customer network, and if so, why?

Assertions: If a customer is multihomed, the $40 linksys is no longer the appropriate CPE device (clearly multihoming is for resiliency, and the linksys is not exactly what we'd call "high-availability" ;)

If a customer is singly-homed, why not statically route them? Let the routing protocol they run be exclusive to their network. If they're trying to do some kind of load-balancing or failover mechanism, get them to use something other than Layer-3 resiliency (perhaps layer-7 resiliency?)

So, while the problems Cisco has with RIPv2 are non-trivial, why are they impacting a production network?

-David

	Start a set with this search
	Include this search in one of my sets
	Exclude this search from one of my sets
	Permalink to these results Paste this link in email or IM:
	Atom feed for tracking future search results Paste this URL into your reader: