I agree completely. I think the whole "hybrid" was a marketing department decision. I'm just glad to find out I wasn't the only one who thought this.
scott ""Peter van Oene"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > At 03:54 PM 3/7/2003 +0000, The Long and Winding Road wrote: > >""Peter van Oene"" wrote in message > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > At 12:11 PM 3/7/2003 +0000, Johan Bornman wrote: > > > >Is EIGRP a Hybrid or Distance Vector protocol? > > > > > > Cisco calls it Hybrid. It looks pretty distance vector to me though. > > > >in what way? the hop count is pretty well hidden in the dark interior of the > >code. all those cost numbers, the ( also somewhat hidden ) topology table, > >and the ( somewaht hidden ) successor table certainly give it the appearance > >of link state. > > In a link state algorithm, a router builds a complete topology table for > the bounded area in which it operates and then uses a spanning tree like > algorithm (dijkstra in most cases) to calculate loop free paths. EIGRP > simply does not do this. Primary and secondary paths in EIGRP are > calculated based upon indirect information relayed by direct neighbors only > using an advanced distance vector algorithm (DUAL). > > I think Cisco likes to call it Hybrid since many folks feel distance vector > routing is inferior to link state and thus by labelling EIGRP as the best > of both approaches, Cisco has put a positive spin on the protocol. This is > typical marketing garbage from one of the best spin companies on the planet > (in a neck and neck race with Microsoft and Harley Davidson for that matter) > > Pete > > > > >Chuck > >who considers all this stuff a kind of magic > > > > > > > > >A hello mechanism and adjacencies does not a link state one make. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64741&t=64707 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
