[bdNOG] ISIS of OSPF

Jahangir Hossain jrjahangir at gmail.com
Mon Nov 18 23:54:52 BDT 2013


I am agree with farid bhai opinion .  Simple Like it :)

if service provider want to provide MPLS service within large network as
like Fiber at Home , IS-IS makes it easy  also makes convergence time  faster
than OSPF.






Regards  //  Jahangir Hossain
                  Earth TeleCom


On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC / Sr.Manager /
01678618243 / <simon.baroi at fiberathome.net> wrote:

> Dear Mitul Vai,
>
> Thanks for the details information.
>
> We couldn't make TE-FRR, as so many tunnels to be made from each node.
>
> Some people told us to use RSVP to each hand of the last mile nodes. Does
> it help me ?
> Or it will create another large problem ?
>
>
> We have used BFD. Now running it. But we need more faster convergence.
>
> < some times I think SDH is better and more simpler......8-) >
>
> - with regards
>
> SIMON
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Mehadi Hasan Mitul <
> mmitul at banglalinkgsm.com> wrote:
>
>>  My opinion is same as of Roman vai.
>>
>> Moving to the main topic of Simon vai, where the concentration is to fast
>> convergence in large MPLS network. I think it can be achieved in the
>> following ways: -
>>
>> *‘Enable the MPLS applications for example: MPLS VPN, TE-FRR & MPLS Based
>> QoS’.*
>>
>> a.     In MPLS VPN based network; OSPF will only manage the L3 uplinks
>> between PE-P & P-P. Therefore the size of routing table will remain
>> minimum. Use MP-iBGP to share the VPNv4 prefixes between PEs.
>>
>> b.    Enable TE-FRR between P-P and PE-P; which will ensure the
>> convergence in <50ms.
>>
>> c.     Enable MPLS based QoS and assign traffic priority to required
>> customer VPN only.
>>
>> d.    Also vendor specific VPN-FRR technology can be used with the aid
>> of BFD. This technology offers convergence between PE-PE in <200ms.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> *Mehadi* Hasan Mitul
>>
>> PS Core & MPBN Planning Team Leader
>>
>> banglalinkTM
>>
>> Cell: +880 19161 00368
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* nog-bounces at bdnog.org [mailto:nog-bounces at bdnog.org] *On Behalf
>> Of *Nurul Islam
>> *Sent:* 18 November, 2013 8:35 AM
>> *To:* Md. Faridul Alam | Aamra; 'Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC /
>> Sr.Manager / 01678618243 /'; nog at bdnog.org
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [bdNOG] ISIS of OSPF
>>
>>
>>
>> With regards to IGP convergence issues I believe there is no big
>> difference between OSPF and IS-IS if I am not wrong. My 1+ for IS-IS if you
>> have multiple routed protocol I.e. IPv4 and IPv6 etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> In SP network convergence issues are mostly handled in design level I.e.
>> de-coupling IGP and EGP. I.e Only loopback and p2p link in OSPF/ISIS. So if
>> there is any topology change in IGP, packet loss probability is very very
>> less.
>>
>>
>>
>> For external prefixes like downstream customer and upstream Internet,
>> people mostly use eBGP. Across the infrastructure iBGP. Convergence time is
>> an issue here specially if you have full BGP feed from multiple upstream.
>> Try using vendor specific tools like BFD, BGP scanner etc. Or full BGP feed
>> from single upstream and default from other etc. What else? :)
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>> Roman
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *"Md. Faridul Alam | Aamra" <faridul.alam at aamra.com.bd>
>> *Date: *Monday, 18 November 2013 5:49 AM
>> *To: *"'Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC / Sr.Manager / 01678618243 /'" <
>> simon.baroi at fiberathome.net>, "nog at bdnog.org" <nog at bdnog.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [bdNOG] ISIS of OSPF
>>
>>
>>
>> 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<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
>> link.
>>
>> Number of router will be around 600.
>>
>> Need your help guys.
>>
>> - SIMON
>> 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 <simon.baroi at fiberathome.net>  |  Skype :
>> tx.fttx  |
>>
>> *Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. Respect. It's the little things that really can
>> make a difference.*
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nog mailing list
>> nog at bdnog.org
>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *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 <simon.baroi at fiberathome.net>  |  Skype :
> tx.fttx  |
>
>
> * Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. Respect. It's the little things that really can
> make a difference. *
>
> _______________________________________________
> nog mailing list
> nog at bdnog.org
> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>
>


-- 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.bdnog.org/pipermail/nog/attachments/20131118/ef229519/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the nog mailing list