1 / 9

Routing Protocol Comparison

Routing Protocol Comparison. AfNOG Workshops Philip Smith. Static and Dynamic Routing. Static Routing is a simplistic approach Shortcomings Cumbersome to configure Cannot adapt to addition of new links or nodes Cannot adapt to link or node failures Does not scale to large networks

lrittenberry
Télécharger la présentation

Routing Protocol Comparison

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Routing Protocol Comparison AfNOG Workshops Philip Smith

  2. Static and Dynamic Routing • Static Routing is a simplistic approach • Shortcomings • Cumbersome to configure • Cannot adapt to addition of new links or nodes • Cannot adapt to link or node failures • Does not scale to large networks • Solution is to use Dynamic Routing

  3. Desirable Characteristics • Automatically detect and adapt to topology changes • Provide optimal routing • Scalability • Robustness • Simplicity • Rapid convergence • Some control of routing choices • E.g. which links we prefer to use

  4. Convergence – why do I care? • Convergence is when all the routers have the same routing information • When a network is not converged there is network downtime • Packets don’t get to where they are supposed to go • Black holes (packets “disappear”) • Routing Loops (packets go back and fore between the same devices) • Occurs when there is a change in status of router or the links

  5. Interior Gateway Protocols • RIP • “Routing Information Protocol” – “Rest In Peace”  • Lots of scaling problems • RIPv1 is classful, and officially obsolete • EIGRP • “Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol” • Cisco-only routing protocol • IS-IS • “Intermediate System to Intermediate System” • Forerunner of OSPF • Multiprotocol (OSPF supports IP only)

  6. Why not use RIP? • RIP is a Distance Vector Algorithm • Listen to neighbouring routes • Install all routes in routing table • Lowest hop count wins • Advertise all routes in table • Very simple, very stupid • Metric is hop count only • Infinity of 16 (not large enough) • Slow convergence (routing loops) • Poor robustness

  7. OSPF • Open Shortest Path First • “Open” means it is not proprietary (IETF standard) • Uses “Shortest Path First” algorithm • Dynamic IGP, Link State Protocol • Use this in your network • Encourages good network design • Easy to learn • Has fast convergence • Scales very well

  8. Link State Algorithm • Each router contains a database containing a map of the whole topology • Links • Their state (including cost) • All routers have the same information • All routers calculate the best path to every destination • Any link state changes are flooded across the network • “Global spread of local knowledge”

  9. Summary • Comparison of static routes, RIP and OSPF • Dynamic Routing Protocol should be used in any ISP network • Static routes don’t scale • RIP doesn’t scale (and is obsolete) • OSPF will be covered in more detail shortly

More Related