RE: Dynamic or Static routing
Thanks you all for the answers!!!
Saludos. Pablo.
PD: These answers are not for me, but for my boss!!
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Andrew Miehs [mailto:andrew@2sheds.de]
Enviado el: Lunes, 06 de Febrero de 2006 08:12 p.m.
Para: Léo Goehrs
CC: Pablo; Debian-ISP List
Asunto: Re: Dynamic or Static routing
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
If you need to ask these questions then static routing is more than
adequate.
You need dynamic routing where you have multiple paths through your
network.
IE: Load balancing/ Fail-over lines inside your network. (Although
you could
use metrics and static routes here if it is a very simple network).
RIP is NEVER a solution for a service provider. OSPF and IS-IS are two
of the most used solutions, although I do know of one instance where
a larger
provider ran there customer routes through iBGP.
These requirements also change on whether you want to run MPLS in
your core.
My recommendation - if you have a simple network, keep it simple by
using statics.
Andrew
On Feb 6, 2006, at 11:40 PM, Léo Goehrs wrote:
> Static routes is definitely a bad idea, in medium to large
> nerworks, prefer OSPF☺
>
> Leo Goehrs
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Do anyone use or have a complete static-routing based
> network for customers (Cable Modem, DSL, dial-up, etc.) and/or
> backbone? Why static routing could be better than dynamic routing
> (RIPv2 or OSPF)?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Saludos. Pablo.
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFD59esW126qUNSzvURAh+NAJ9xi1D2abYDmj17HSahwHQvfVHdnACghivv
awfsHpZ+AK8z9tl0wKX2DuI=
=c+It
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: