howard wrote >. I have several presentations on this at >www.nanog.org and www.arin.net, as well as in my books.
howard i had a quick look around both sites and couldnt find them ... please can you post the earl sorry URL thanks steve >From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: How would you design a Network ? [7:32067] wrap up... >[7:32174] >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:12:50 -0500 > > >thanks for the good feedback from the list and madman, chuck, howard, and > >steve. I admit the static routes work efficiently, and they do the load > >balancing as required. It just seems a bit uncool to be all static , >that's > >all. > >Seriously, Jason, my experience in building lots of big networks says >proper static routes (with all the bells and whistles such as >different administrative distances, load balancing, and aggregation) >are very cool. > >Relatively early in my Cisco routing experience, I was chatting with >Tony Li, who was then the lead routing code designer for Cisco. He >made the idle comment that he judged a good network design as one >that had more, not less, static routes -- and you're talking here >about the coauthor of the BGP standard. > >I particularly remember one large enterprise redesign where I was the >architectural consultant. They had 2500 routers, mostly talking IGRP >but a few from a non-Cisco vendor speaking RIP or OSPF. The overall >goal was to move to OSPF. > >On detailed investigation, only 400 of the 2500 routers had any real >alternative connectivity, where dynamic routing would have helped. >The rest only had a single link to a distribution router, or perhaps >a single dedicated link with a dial backup. Static/default serves >just fine in those cases. > >One of the things that makes the use of statics easier is to remember >that when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything tends to >look like a nail. If one only looks at the routers proper as the >networking tools, dynamic routing tends to look more attractive. > >But when you consider that you need to do IP address assignment, you >are going to have at least a spreadsheet somewhere. It's not hard to >have that assignment process automatically generate your static >routes and DNS commands. I have several presentations on this at >www.nanog.org and www.arin.net, as well as in my books. > > >If we go any direction it will probably be with eigrp, I like the idea > >of the WAN update controls inherent when forced to carrying IPX/SPX to >some > >sites from the core. i could have done without the archive crack from > >patrick. ;-) > > > > > > > >jason > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 05:25 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: How would you design a Network ? [7:32067] > > > > > > > > > > > > > >why do you think you need to change? seriously? what would dynamic >routing > > > >give you that you don't have now - in terms of stability and the like? > > > > > > > >it might seem an odd thing to say, but I believe that dynamic routing in > > > >small environments, and maybe even in some larger environments, is over > > > >rated, no matter whose routers or what routing protocols you use. > > > > > > > >BTW, I am personally acquainted with a portion of the network of a very > > > >large technology company that consists entirely of static routes. Over >3000 > > > >of them. They had a particular good reason for doing it this way. But my > > > >point is that there are considerations other than "because you can" or > > > >"because you want to" > > > > > > > >Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > >""Bullock, Jason"" wrote in message > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > >> Listers. > > > >> > > > >> I would like to make some routing changes to a mostly static routing > > > >> environment. Currently everything is either routed via default >gateway, > > > >or > > > >> static route statements. > > > >> > > > >> the environment consists of about 30 remote point to point WAN sites, >with > > > >> most data traffic consisting of IP. We have several sites on dual >T1's, > > > >and > > > >> all sites are terminating at a central corporate location. So a big >star > > > >> network. The vendor of choice is cisco for routing and switching. > > > >> > > > >> Anyone see OSPF, EIGRP, BGP, IGRP, ISIS as the way to go? I would >like > > > >to > > > >> make this network more dynamic, just having a hard time justifying the > > > >move. > > > >> > > > >> All thoughts appreciated! > > > >> > > > >> thanks, > > > >> Jason _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=32183&t=32183 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
