Md. Faridul Alam | Aamra faridul.alam at aamra.com.bd
Mon Nov 18 01:49:19 BDT 2013

I prefer IS-IS over OSPF for below reasons:

1.       Security

2.       Modularity

3.       Overload Mechanism

Also, I prefer IS-IS over OSPF because we can design a large networks by
building a single large Level 1 (L1) area without any hierarchies in IS-IS
and still be able to manage, something that would be difficult with OSPF.
There are issues with inter-area traffic engineering and such and most
people would like to keep their network as a single area if the routing
protocol can manage it.


There are some restrictions for applications like MPLS TE that require flat
area 0 for OSPF or flat level 2 for IS-IS. This also simplifies the design
so heirarchy isn't an issue. But maintaining large number of LSA's in a
single area is very difficult for OSPF. So IS-IS is better for MPLS.



Regards, Farid

Aamra, the power of WE

From: nog-bounces at bdnog.org [mailto:nog-bounces at bdnog.org] On Behalf Of
Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC / Sr.Manager / 01678618243 /
Sent: 18-Nov-2013 12:08 AM
To: nog at bdnog.org
Subject: [bdNOG] ISIS of OSPF


Dare All the bdNOG friends,

Which one is better ISIS or OSPF.

I'm mainly focusing of fast convergence time. My clients can not give me any
ping loss in that convergence moment, if one fiber goes down in my MPLS

Number of router will be around 600.

Need your help guys.

Fiber at Home.

Simon Sohel Baroi  |  Sr. Manager, Technology  |  PICO  |   ITC - IIG  |
Cell : +880-1678-618243, +880-181-7022207  |  Desk : +880-9666776677
Ext-1031  |  

Mail : simon.baroi at pico.net.bd <mailto:simon.baroi at fiberathome.net>   |
Skype : tx.fttx  |

Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. Respect. It's the little things that really can make
a difference.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.bdnog.org/pipermail/nog/attachments/20131118/74b53e09/attachment.html>

More information about the nog mailing list