Comments on: EIGRP vs OSPF – Take 2

By: Donnie Savage

Donnie Savage — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:23:15 +0000

Thank you for the kind words!

0 likes

By: filmes online

filmes online — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 00:12:11 +0000

Well the interesting content! Congratulations, I have a blog and I know how difficult it is to make a quality content!

0 likes

By: Donnie Savage

Donnie Savage — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 18:45:15 +0000

Yes, this is correct. However please keep in mind that OSPF as offered has a licensed limit of 200 routes, no fast hellos, and a single routing process. The route counts also apply for EIGRP, but with EIGRP its easy to filter selected routes ,ensuring your within the software licensee, without have to move the router into a separate AS/Area

0 likes

By: Steve B

Steve B — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:38:16 +0000

With reference to people mentioning EIGRP as a design choice with 3560/3750 IPBASE. I note with the -X models at least, the OSPF Routed Access feature is also in IPBASE. It seems comparable so it goes back to the other reasons for choosing!

0 likes

By: Michael P.

Michael P. — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 21:37:04 +0000

Same issue facing LISP. The internet drafts are Cisco only as are the implementations. When evaluating protocols at the ‘informational’ and ‘experimental’ draft stage I’d suggest confirming that more than one vendor is contributing and implementing.

0 likes

By: Donnie Savage

Donnie Savage — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 16:10:40 +0000

While EIGRP does not route based on “hops to destination”, EIGRP does keep track of it and can be used to poison a route if it exceed a limit. The default is 100 Hops, but this is configurable up to 255.

0 likes

By: Pankaj Bansal

Pankaj Bansal — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 15:30:19 +0000

Before EIGRP hit our scenes we had IGRP, Interior Gatway Routing Protocol.Cisco developed IGRP in the mid-1980s as an answer to the limitations of RIP, the most significant of which are the hop count metric and the 15-hop network size. IGRP calculated a composite metric from a variety of route variables and provided “knobs” for weighting the variables to reflect the specific characteristics and needs of the network. Although hop count is not one of these variables, IGRP did track hop count, and could be implemented on networks of up to 255 hops in diameter.

0 likes

By: cliqueaqui

cliqueaqui — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:04:39 +0000

Every Good artigle!

0 likes

By: Marc Abel

Marc Abel — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 02:56:07 +0000

I’ll add my voice to Ryan Malayter’s above, I would have a much easier time recommending EIGRP if it were multi vendor. I think this would actually benefit Cisco. I would know it COULD work with other vendors, but would work with Cisco best. So it would incentivise me to recommend it and Cisco, but ensure in those cases where Cisco wasn’t the best choice still be supportable.

0 likes

By: EIGRP Debated on the Interwebs | Unadulterated Nerdery

EIGRP Debated on the Interwebs | Unadulterated Nerdery — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 01:55:09 +0000

[...] I chose this article because of the author, which I am sure you will recognize. Outside of hearing what Jeff Doyle has to say, take a look at the comments. The comment by Don Savage was particularly enlightening. Speaking of Don Savage: http://blogs.cisco.com/getyourbuildon/eigrp-vs-ospf-take-2/ [...]

0 likes