EIGRP and OSPF Comparison

For
<Client>
Client Sponsor
Prepared By
Scott Hogg
Project Number
02
Date
March 14, 2002
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
Distribution List
Name itle!Duties Company
John Vogt-Nilsen Manager Network Operations <Client>
Sammy Hutton Prinipal Systems !nalyst <Client>
Sott Hogg Prinipal Consultant "uent
Phil Colon Managing Consultant "uent
Re"ision #istory
$ersion Date %ut&or Comments
#$% %&'#(')%%) Sott Hogg *nitial +ra,t
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
%BLE OF CONENS
Para'rap& ( Description Pa'e
)*+ E,ecuti"e Summary*********************************************************************************)
-*+ Introduction**********************************************************************************************)
)$# *n-ustry Stan-ar- protools .s$ Proprietary protools/$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)
.*+ ec&nical Bac/'round*****************************************************************************-
&$# 0ypes O, 1outing Protools$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)
&$#$# Stati 1outing$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)
&$#$) +istane Vetor Protools$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$&
&$#$& "ink-State Protools$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$(
&$#$( !-.ane- +istane Vetor Protool$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$2
&$#$2 Path Vetor Protools$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$2
0*+ Protocol Decision Criteria***********************************************************************1
1*+ OSPF*********************************************************************************************************2
3*+ EIGRP*****************************************************************************************************)2
4*+ %nalysis***************************************************************************************************-)
2*+ Recommendation************************************************************************************--
5*+ Re6erences***********************************************************************************************-.
3$# 41"s )&
3$#$# OSP5$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)&
3$#$) 6*71P$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)(
3$) 8ooks )(
3$)$# OSP5$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)(
3$)$) 6*71P$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)(
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
1.0 Executive Summary
0he <Client> network is 9ase- on the 0CP'*P protool: whih permits the e,,iient routing o,
-ata pakets 9ase- on their *P a--ress$ Ciso routers are use- at .arious points in the
network to ontrol an- ,orwar- the -ata$ !latel OmniSwith swith'routers are also use- in
the Site ) ,ailities$
!t the urrent point a -eision is 9eing ma-e 9y <Client> on whether to keep the e;isting
!latel in,rastruture in the Site ) ,aility or migrate that e<uipment to similar Ciso
e<uipment as e;ists in Site #$ 0he urrent !latel e<uipment is e;periening se.ere pro9lems
suh as har-ware ,ailures: power supply ,ailures: operating system memory leaks resulting in
re9oots$ *, the -eision is ma-e to upgra-e the !latel swith'routers then an e.aluation will
nee- to 9e ma-e on what the proper routing protool <Client> shoul- 9e running orporate
wi-e will 9e nee-e-$ 0his woul- 9e an e.aluation o, suita9ility o, 6nhane- *nterior
7ateway 1outing Protool =6*71P> or Open Shortest Path 5irst =OSP5>$
*n or-er ,or the routers to e,,eti.ely an- e,,iiently -istri9ute -ata to the users in the ,iel-:
the routers must 9e programme- with the topology o, the network$ *n other wor-s: the
routers must ontain a ?map@ o, the other routers in the network an- what 0CP'*P -e.ies are
onnete- to them$
0here are a num9er o, metho-s to program the routers with this in,ormation an- to hange
the program as the network hanges$ 0he hoie o, metho-: or routing protocol is a ritial
,ator in the suess o, the network o.er time$ 5ators that -i,,erentiate one routing protool
,rom another inlu-e the spee- that it a-apts to topology hanges =convergence>: the a9ility
to hoose the 9est route among multiple routes =route calculation>: an- the amount o,
network tra,,i that the routing protool reates$
8ase- on this e.aluation o, the suita9ility o, a routing protool ,or <Client>As route- 0CP'*P
network the 6*71P routing protool shoul- 9e use- in the !latel routers are upgra-e- to
Ciso routers$ Howe.er: i, the !latel routers are retaine- ,or ser.ie within the Site )
ampus then <Client> has no alternati.e 9ut to run OSP5 throughout the organiBation$
2.0 Introduction
Ciso has -ominate- the router in-ustry ,or many reasons$ One o, the most ommon reasons
is CisoAs support ,or a multitu-e o, protools as well as ,eatures in their *OS to enhane a
routerAs a9ility to ontrol tra,,i an- impro.e per,ormane: an- in some ases: sa.e money$ *t
makes sense ,or a ompany that utiliBes Ciso routers in their network: to take a-.antage o,
the ,eatures an- ,untionality that has helpe- Ciso 9eome the lea-er in terms o, market
share$
2.1 Industry Standard protocols vs. Proprietary protocols:
! ase an 9e ma-e ,or 9oth stan-ar- as well as proprietary protools$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
S%ND%RDS PRO/ ! stan-ar-s 9ase- protool will theoretially allow routers o, -i,,erent
manu,aturers to inter-operate$
S%ND%RDS CON/ Stan-ar-s 9ase- protools re<uire in-ustry appro.al ,or hanges$
Historially hanges: as well as impro.ements or a-.anements: are rare$ Changes to the
OSP5 15C ha.e not ourre- sine #3CD$
PROPRIE%R7 PRO/ Owner an a-.ane the protool to new le.els without the
agreement o, a onsortium o, ompanies resulting in a protool with the latest in
tehnologial a-.anements$
PROPRIE%R7 CON/ Protool is not supporte- 9y other .en-ors re<uiring the
implementation o, a seon- protool$ 4se o, a proprietary protool is only an issue internally
when using multiple .en-ors ,or routers: re<uiring a gateway router to re--istri9ute routes$
0his is generally not an issue with e;ternal networks: sine e;terior gate protools like 87P
are use- when onneting outsi-e$
Proprietary protool stan-ar-s ompliane is an issue 9eause the <Client> network is
urrently omprise- o, 9oth Ciso an- !latel routers$ 0he !latel routers support 1*P .#
an- .): OSP5: an- 87P-( only$ 0hey -onAt support CisoAs proprietary 6*71P$
*n making a -etermination as to whih routing protool =stay with 1*P .#'.): OSP5: or
6*71P> shoul- 9e use-: <Client> has to look at tehnial as well as the a-ministrati.e
9ene,its to 9e -eri.e- ,rom eah$ *t is o9.ious that 1*P .# nee-s to 9e eliminate- an- that
-eision has alrea-y 9een ma-e: so a matri; o, ,eatures an- 9ene,its 9etween OSP5 an-
6*71P nee-s to 9e -e.elope-$
3.0 Technical Bac!round
3.1 Types "# $outin! Protocols
3.1.1 Static Routing
0he simplest ,orm o, routing is stati routes$ 0he routing in,ormation is preprogramme- 9y
the network a-ministrator$ Ehen hanges to the network our: the route in,ormation must
9e manually hange- throughout the network$
0here are a num9er o, a-.antages to using stati routes$ Stati routing is .ery resoure
e,,iient: as it routing uses no a--itional network 9an-wi-th: -oesnFt use any router CP4
yles trying to alulate routes: an- re<uires ,ar less memory$ *t is also the most seure
,orm o, routing protool$
Howe.er: there are a num9er o, -isa-.antages to stati routing that eliminate it as a .ia9le
alternati.e on the <Client> network$ 5irst an- ,oremost: in the rapi-ly hanging topology o,
a wireless network: it is impratial ,or a network a-ministrator to manually program the
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
routing hanges as they our$ Seon-ly: in the ase o, a network ,ailure: stati routing is
usually not apa9le o, hoosing alternate paths$
3.1.2 Distance Vector Protocols
+istane .etor protools suh as 1outing *n,ormation Protool =1*P>: *nterior 7ateway
1outing Protool =*71P>: *nternetwork Paket 6;hange =*PG> 1*P: *PG Ser.ie
!-.ertisement Protool =S!P>: an- 1outing 0a9le Maintenane Protool =10MP>: 9roa-ast
their omplete routing ta9le perio-ially: regar-less o, whether the routing ta9le has hange-$
0his perio-i a-.ertisement .aries ,rom e.ery #% seon-s ,or 10MP to e.ery 3% seon-s ,or
*71P$ Ehen the network is sta9le: -istane .etor protools 9eha.e well 9ut waste o,
9an-wi-th 9eause o, the perio-i sen-ing o, routing ta9le up-ates: e.en when no hange
has ourre-$ Ehen a ,ailure ours in the network: -istane .etor protools -o not a--
e;essi.e loa- to the network: 9ut they take a long time to reon.erge to an alternate path or
to ,lush a 9a- path ,rom the network$
+istane Vetor 1outing protools are dynamic$ 1outers that use -istane .etor routing
share in,ormation: or a routing map: with other routers on the network$ !s hanges to the
network our: the router with the hange propagates the new routing in,ormation aross the
entire network$
*n routing 9ase- on -istane-.etor algorithms: routers perio-ially pass opies o, their entire
routing ta9le to routers that are their imme-iate neigh9ors$ 6ah reipient o, this in,ormation
a--s a distance vector =itAs own -istane .alue> to the routing ta9le 9e,ore it ,orwar-s it on to
its neigh9ors$ 0his proess ontinues in an omni -iretional manner among onnete-
routers$ 6.entually eah router on the network learns a9out all the others an- is a9le to
-e.elop a umulati.e network ?map$@ 6ah router then knows how to reah any other router:
an- any other network onnete- to the router$
+istane .etor routing pro.i-es a tremen-ous a-.antage o.er stati routing$ 1outers are
a9le to -iso.er the state o, the network: an- to propagate hanges as they our$ 0he most
ommon: an- most u9i<uitous o, -istane .etor routing protools is the 1outing *n,ormation
Protool: or 1*P$
Howe.er: there are also some -isa-.antages to -istane .etor routing that prelu-e its use
on the <Client> network/
8eause -istane .etor routing protools perio-ially transmit the entire routing ta9le to
all imme-iate neigh9ors: they an a-- signi,iant tra,,i$ 0his is partiularly pro9lemati
on a wireless network with limite- 9an-wi-th$
+istane .etor protools are notoriously slow to on.erge: or a-apt to network topology
hanges$ !,ter a hange to the network: an- 9e,ore all the routers ha.e on.erge-: there
is the pro9a9ility o, routing errors an- lost -ata$
+istane .etor routing protools 9ase their routing -eisions on distance: or the num9er
o, ?hops@ ,rom one network to another$ *t -oes not take into onsi-eration the spee- or
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
9an-wi-th o, a network path$ 0here,ore: routers may route tra,,i through paths that are
su9optimum$
3.1.3 Link-State Protocols
"ink-state routing protools: suh as Open Shortest Path 5irst =OSP5>: *nterme-iate System-
to-*nterme-iate System =*S-*S>: an- NetEare "ink Ser.ies Protool =N"SP>: were -esigne-
to a--ress the limitations o, -istane .etor routing protools =slow on.ergene an-
unneessary 9an-wi-th usage>$ "ink-state protools are more omple; than -istane .etor
protools: an- running them a--s to the routerFs o.erhea-$ 0he a--itional o.erhea- =in the
,orm o, memory utiliBation an- 9an-wi-th onsumption when link-state protools ,irst start
up> onstrains the num9er o, neigh9ors that a router an support an- the num9er o, neigh9ors
that an 9e in an area$ Ehen the network is sta9le: link-state protools minimiBe 9an-wi-th
usage 9y sen-ing up-ates only when a hange ours$ ! hello mehanism asertains
reaha9ility o, neigh9ors$ Ehen a ,ailure ours in the network: link-state protools ,loo-
"ink-State !-.ertisements ="S!s> throughout an area$ "S!s ause e.ery router within the
,aile- area to realulate routes$ 0he ,at that "S!s nee- to 9e ,loo-e- throughout the area
in ,ailure mo-e an- the ,at that all routers realulate routing ta9les onstrain the num9er o,
neigh9ors that an 9e in an area$
"ink state routing protools: like -istane .etor protools: are dynamic$ 0hey propagate
route in,ormation aross networks$ Howe.er: they ha.e a num9er o, a-.antages o.er
-istane .etor protools$
One o, the maHor a-.antages o, link-state routing is that they alulate the 9est route ,or -ata
9ase- on cost rather than -istane$ 0he algorithms use- to -etermine ost .ary ,rom protool
to protool: 9ut it is generally 9ase- on a linkAs 9an-wi-th$ 0hus: the router that the -ata
paket takes to get to its -estination is optimiBe-$
!--itionally: link state protools -o not transmit their entire topology -ata9ase aross the
network on a perio-i 9asis$ One the network has on.erge-: protool tra,,i is limite- to
hanges in spei,i links =link state a-.ertisement pakets> an- keep-ali.e or ?hello@ pakets$
5inally: on.ergene times ,or link state protools are generally muh shorter than ,or
-istane .etor protools$ ! network 9ase- on link-state routing will reogniBe an- a-apt to
,ailures an- hanges muh more <uikly$
0here are a ,ew -isa-.antages to link state routing protools that must 9e onsi-ere-$ 0hey
are generally muh more omple; than either stati routes or -istane-.etor routing$ 0his
translates into higher implementation osts: higher CP4 utiliBation: an- greater memory
re<uirements$
3.1.4 Advanced Distance Vector Protocol
6nhane- *nterior 7ateway 1outing Protool =6*71P> is an a-.ane- -istane .etor
protool that has some o, the properties o, link-state protools$ 6nhane- *71P a--resses
the limitations o, on.entional -istane .etor routing protools =slow on.ergene an- high
9an-wi-th onsumption in a stea-y state network>$ Ehen the network is sta9le: 6nhane-
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
*71P sen-s up-ates only when a hange in the network ours$ "ike link-state protools:
6nhane- *71P uses a hello mehanism to -etermine the reaha9ility o, neigh9ors$ Ehen a
,ailure ours in the network: 6nhane- *71P looks ,or ,easi9le suessors 9y sen-ing
messages to its neigh9ors$ 0he searh ,or ,easi9le suessors an 9e aggressi.e in terms o,
the tra,,i it generates =up-ates: <ueries an- replies> to ahie.e on.ergene$ 0his 9eha.ior
onstrains the num9er o, neigh9ors that are possi9le$
3.1.5 Path Vector Protocols
0here is really only one Path Vetor routing protool an- it is 8or-er 7ateway Protool
.ersion ( =87P-(>$ 0his is the primary routing protool use- on the *nternet to share routing
up-ates 9etween !utonomous Systems =!S>$ !n !utonomous System is a network un-er a
single a-ministrati.e an- tehnial ontrol$ !Ss are typially -e,ine- 9y the 9oun-aries o, a
single ompany or organiBational entity$ 87P-( is typially use- 9etween *nternet Ser.ie
Pro.i-ers =*SPs> an- 9etween ompanies an- the multiple *SPs they use ,or upstream *nternet
onneti.ity$ 87P-( routers operate in either 6;ternal 87P =687P> or *nternal 87P =*87P>
on,igurations -epen-ing on whether the onneti.ity is 9etween !Ss or within !Ss
respeti.ely$ Sine <Client> urrently -e,ault routes towar- their *nternet points o, presene
there is little reason ,or <Client> to use this protool$ 1egar-less: 87P-( woul- not 9e use-
within the orporate network an- only in the ,uture woul- it 9e use- in a limite- apaity at
the *nternet e-ges o, the <Client> intranet$
%.0 Protocol &ecision 'riteria
*n or-er to on-ut a proper e.aluation <Client>As re<uirements ,or a routing protool shoul-
9e -oumente-$
Simpliity o, on,iguration is a signi,iant re<uirement ,or <Client>As seletion o, a routing
protool$ *t must 9e easy to on,igure an- easy to maintain$ <Client>As *0 resoures are
urrently strethe- thinly an- omple;ity o, a routing protool is a primary onsi-eration$
Currently within the Ciso portions o, the <Client> network OSP5 is 9eing use- 9ut only
with all routers 9eing in a single !rea %$ 0his was -one ,or simpliity an- to re-ue the
omple;ity o, on,iguring !rea 8or-er 1outers =!81s>$ Howe.er: the entire a-.antage o,
OSP5As hierarhy is not 9eing taken a-.antage o,$
<Client> is using 15C#3#C a--resses internally suh that Site # !riBona an-
Eestern regions o, the ompany uses the #I)$#D$%$%'#) while Site ) an- other parts o, the
ompany use #%$%$%$%'C$ 0he #3)$#DC$%$%'#D is 9eing use- ,or the internal si-e o, the
*nternet portals$ Ehen onsi-ering a 0CP'*P routing protool the *P a--ressing plays a
signi,iant role in the -eision an- engineering proess$ 0here,ore: it is a re<uirement that
<Client> use a routing protool that supports Varia9le "ength Su9net Masking =V"SM>$ 0he
1*P .ersion # that is 9eing use- in Site ) in a lass,ul routing protool that -oes not support
V"SM an- it has alrea-y 9een -etermine- that 1*P nee-s to 9e phase- out$
0he Site # !riBona an- the Eestern regions o, the ompany use Ciso routers while the Site )
an- 6astern regions o, the ompany use !latel OmniSwith swith'routers$ 0here,ore: only
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
the Ciso portions o, the network an use 6*71P 9eause o, its proprietary nature$ 0his
issue has alrea-y 9een mentione- pre.iously in this -oument$
0here are some networks within the <Client> enterprise network that use *PG ,or some
appliations$ 0he *PG protool is use- only in Site ) an- a ,ew other loations$ 0he use o,
*PG is 9eing -epreate- an- will 9e eliminate- soon$ 0he <uestions in e;atly when this will
9e omplete$ *t shoul- 9e mentione- that to aomplish this *PG routing within the urrent
<Client> network *PG ,or 1*P is 9eing use-$ 0he 6*71P protool has the a9ility to support
not only *P: 9ut *PG an- !pple0alk with a single routing protool$ 0his pro.i-es a--e-
,untionality om9ine- with simpliity$
8elow is a list o, riteria that shoul- 9e onsi-ere- 9y <Client> -uring the routing protool
seletion proess$
%D8INISR%I$E CRIERI%
COS-0here is a ost assoiate- with any implementation$ 0he ost in this instane
is the la9or nee-e- to implement the protool$
E%SE OF I8PLE8EN%ION-0he ease o, implementation is important 9eause
it is also tie- into the ost o, the manpower an- skills re<uire- to implement$
SPEED OF I8PLE8EN%ION-0he importane o, spee- is to get to a point o,
sta9ility in the <Client> network as soon as possi9le$
EC#NOLOGIC%L CRIERI%
SEC9RI7- Controlling aess to network resoures is a primary onern$ Some
routing protools pro.i-e tehni<ues that an 9e use- as part o, a seurity strategy$
Eith some routing protools: you an insert a ,ilter on the routes 9eing a-.ertise- so
that ertain routes are not a-.ertise- in some parts o, the network$
Some routing protools an authentiate routers that run the same protool$
!uthentiation mehanisms are protool spei,i an- generally weak$ *n spite o, this:
it is worthwhile to take a-.antage o, the tehni<ues that e;ist$ !uthentiation an
inrease network sta9ility 9y pre.enting unauthoriBe- routers or hosts ,rom
partiipating in the routing protool: whether those -e.ies are attempting to
partiipate ai-entally or -eli9erately$
CON$ERGENCE- Ehen network topology hanges: network tra,,i must reroute
<uikly$ 0he phrase Jon.ergene timeJ -esri9es the time it takes a router to start
using a new route a,ter a topology hanges$
1outers must -o three things a,ter a topology hanges/
+etet the hange
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
Selet a new route
Propagate the hange- route in,ormation
RO9E SELECION- 1outing protools ompare route metris to selet the 9est
route ,rom a group o, possi9le routes$ 1oute metris are ompute- 9y assigning a
harateristi or set o, harateristis to eah physial network$ 0he metri ,or the
route is an aggregation o, the harateristis o, eah physial network in the route$
SC%L%BILI7- 0he a9ility to e;ten- your internetwork is -etermine-: in part: 9y
the saling harateristis o, the routing protools use- an- the <uality o, the network
-esign$
Network sala9ility is limite- 9y two ,ators/ operational issues an- tehnial issues$
0ypially: operational issues are more signi,iant than tehnial issues$ Operational
saling onerns enourage the use o, large areas or protools that -o not re<uire
hierarhial strutures$ Ehen hierarhial protools are re<uire-: tehnial saling
onerns promote the use o, small areas$
RO9E S988%RI:%ION-$ Eith summariBation: routers an re-ue some sets
o, routes to a single a-.ertisement: re-uing 9oth the loa- on the router an- the
perei.e- omple;ity o, the network$ 0he importane o, route summariBation
inreases with network siBe$
8E8OR7- 1outing protools use memory to store routing ta9les an- topology
in,ormation$ 1oute summariBation uts memory onsumption ,or all routing
protools$ Keeping areas small re-ues the memory onsumption ,or hierarhial
routing protools$
CP9 RE;9IRE8ENS- CP4 usage is protool -epen-ent$ Some protools use
CP4 yles to ompare new routes to e;isting routes$ Other protools use CP4 yles
to regenerate routing ta9les a,ter a topology hange$ *n most ases: the latter
tehni<ue will use more CP4 yles than the ,ormer$ 5or link-state protools: keeping
areas small an- using summariBation re-ues CP4 re<uirements 9y re-uing the
e,,et o, a topology hange an- 9y -ereasing the num9er o, routes that must 9e
reompute- a,ter a topology hange$
B%ND<ID# RE;9IRE8ENS- 8an-wi-th usage is also protool -epen-ent$
0hree key issues -etermine the amount o, 9an-wi-th a routing protool onsumes/
Ehen routing in,ormation is sent---Perio-i up-ates are sent at regular inter.als$
5lash up-ates are sent only when a hange ours$
Ehat routing in,ormation is sent---Complete up-ates ontain all routing
in,ormation$ Partial up-ates ontain only hange- in,ormation$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
Ehere routing in,ormation is sent---5loo-e- up-ates are sent to all routers$
8oun-e- up-ates are sent only to routers that are a,,ete- 9y a hange$
Note/ 0hese three issues also a,,et CP4 usage$
(.0 "SP)
OSP5 is an *nterior 7ateway Protool =*7P> -e.elope- ,or use in *nternet Protool =*P>-
9ase- internetworks$ !s an *7P: OSP5 -istri9utes routing in,ormation 9etween routers
9elonging to a single autonomous system =!S>$ !n !S is a group o, routers e;hanging
routing in,ormation .ia a ommon routing protool$ 0he OSP5 protool is 9ase- on shortest-
path-,irst: or link-state: tehnology$
0wo -esign ati.ities are ritially important to a suess,ul OSP5 implementation/
+e,inition o, area 9oun-aries
!--ress assignment
6nsuring that these ati.ities are properly planne- an- e;eute- will make all the -i,,erene
in an OSP5 implementation$ 6ah is a--resse- in more -etail with the -isussions that
,ollow$ 0hese -isussions are -i.i-e- into si; setions/
OSP5 Network 0opology
OSP5 !--ressing an- 1oute SummariBation
OSP5 1oute Seletion
OSP5 Con.ergene
OSP5 Network Sala9ility
OSP5 Seurity
OSPF Net=or/ opolo'y
OSP5 works 9est in a hierarhial routing en.ironment$ 0he ,irst an- most important
-eision when -esigning an OSP5 network is to -etermine whih routers an- links are to 9e
inlu-e- in the 9ak9one an- whih are to 9e inlu-e- in eah area$
0here are se.eral important gui-elines to onsi-er when -esigning an OSP5 topology/
0he num9er o, routers in an area---OSP5 uses a CP4-intensi.e algorithm$ 0he num9er o,
alulations that must 9e per,orme- gi.en n link-state pakets is proportional to n log n$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
!s a result: the larger an- more unsta9le the area: the greater the likelihoo- ,or
per,ormane pro9lems assoiate- with routing protool realulation$ 7enerally: an area
shoul- ha.e no more than 2% routers$ !reas with unsta9le links shoul- 9e smaller$
0he num9er o, neigh9ors ,or any one router---OSP5 ,loo-s all link-state hanges to all
routers in an area$ 1outers with many neigh9ors ha.e the most work to -o when link-state
hanges our$ *n general: any one router shoul- ha.e no more than D% neigh9ors$
0he num9er o, areas supporte- 9y any one router---! router must run the link-state
algorithm ,or eah link-state hange that ours ,or e.ery area in whih the router resi-es$
6.ery area 9or-er router is in at least two areas =the 9ak9one an- one area>$ *n general:
to ma;imiBe sta9ility: one router shoul- not 9e in more than three areas$
+esignate- router seletion---*n general: the -esignate- router an- 9akup -esignate-
router on a loal-area network ="!N> ha.e the most OSP5 work to -o$ *t is a goo- i-ea to
selet routers that are not alrea-y hea.ily loa-e- with CP4-intensi.e ati.ities to 9e the
-esignate- router an- 9akup -esignate- router$ *n a--ition: it is generally not a goo-
i-ea to selet the same router to 9e -esignate- router on many "!Ns simultaneously$
Bac/bone Considerations
Sta9ility an- re-un-any are the most important riteria ,or the 9ak9one$ Keeping the siBe
o, the 9ak9one reasona9le inreases sta9ility$ 0his is ause- 9y the ,at that e.ery router in
the 9ak9one nee-s to re-ompute its routes a,ter e.ery link-state hange$ Keeping the
9ak9one small re-ues the likelihoo- o, a hange an- re-ues the amount o, CP4 yles
re<uire- to re-ompute routes$ !s a general rule: eah area =inlu-ing the 9ak9one> shoul-
ontain no more than 2% routers$ *, link <uality is high an- the num9er o, routes is small: the
num9er o, routers an 9e inrease-$
1e-un-any is important in the 9ak9one to pre.ent partition when a link ,ails$ 7oo-
9ak9ones are -esigne- so that no single link ,ailure an ause a partition$
OSP5 9ak9ones must 9e ontiguous$ !ll routers in the 9ak9one shoul- 9e -iretly
onnete- to other 9ak9one routers$ OSP5 inlu-es the onept o, .irtual links$ ! .irtual
link reates a path 9etween two area 9or-er routers =an area 9or-er router is a router onnets
an area to the 9ak9one> that are not -iretly onnete-$ ! .irtual link an 9e use- to heal a
partitione- 9ak9one$ Howe.er: it is not a goo- i-ea to -esign an OSP5 network to re<uire
the use o, .irtual links$ 0he sta9ility o, a .irtual link is -etermine- 9y the sta9ility o, the
un-erlying area$ 0his -epen-eny an make trou9leshooting more -i,,iult$ *n a--ition:
.irtual links annot run aross stu9 areas$ See the setion J8ak9one-to-!rea 1oute
!-.ertisement:J later in this hapter ,or a -etaile- -isussion o, stu9 areas$
!.oi- plaing hosts =suh as workstations: ,ile ser.ers or other share- resoures> in the
9ak9one area$ Keeping hosts out o, the 9ak9one area simpli,ies internetwork e;pansion
an- reates a more sta9le en.ironment$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
%rea Considerations
*n-i.i-ual areas must 9e ontiguous$ *n this onte;t: a ontiguous area is one in whih a
ontinuous path an 9e trae- ,rom any router in an area to any other router in the same area$
0his -oes not mean that all routers must share a ommon network me-ia$ *t is not possi9le to
use .irtual links to onnet a partitione- area$ *-eally: areas shoul- 9e rihly onnete-
internally to pre.ent partitioning$
0he two most ritial aspets o, area -esign ,ollow/
+etermining how the area is a--resse-
+etermining how the area is onnete- to the 9ak9one
!reas shoul- ha.e a ontiguous set o, network an-'or su9net a--resses$ <it&out a
conti'uous address space> it is not possible to implement route summari?ation* 0he
routers that onnet an area to the 9ak9one are alle- area 9or-er routers$ !reas an ha.e a
single area 9or-er router or they an ha.e multiple area 9or-er routers$ *n general: it is
-esira9le to ha.e more than one area 9or-er router per area to minimiBe the hane o, the
area 9eoming -isonnete- ,rom the 9ak9one$
Ehen reating large-sale OSP5 internetworks: the -e,inition o, areas an- assignment o,
resoures within areas must 9e -one with a pragmati .iew o, your internetwork$ 0he
,ollowing are general rules that will help ensure that your internetwork remains ,le;i9le an-
pro.i-es the kin- o, per,ormane nee-e- to -eli.er relia9le resoure aess$
Consi-er physial pro;imity when -e,ining areas---*, a partiular loation is -ensely
onnete-: reate an area spei,ially ,or no-es at that loation$
1e-ue the ma;imum siBe o, areas i, links are unsta9le---*, your internetwork inlu-es
unsta9le links: onsi-er implementing smaller areas to re-ue the e,,ets o, route
,lapping$ Ehene.er a route is lost or omes online: eah a,,ete- area must on.erge on a
new topology$ 0he +ykstra algorithm will run on all the a,,ete- routers$ 8y segmenting
your internetwork into smaller areas: you an isolate unsta9le links an- -eli.er more
relia9le o.erall ser.ie$
OSPF %ddressin' and Route Summari?ation
!--ress assignment an- route summariBation are ine;tria9ly linke- when -esigning OSP5
internetworks$ 0o reate a sala9le OSP5 internetwork: you shoul- implement route
summariBation$ 0o reate an en.ironment apa9le o, supporting route summariBation: you
must implement an e,,eti.e hierarhial a--ressing sheme$ 0he a--ressing struture that
you implement an ha.e a pro,oun- impat on the per,ormane an- sala9ility o, your OSP5
internetwork$ 0he ,ollowing setions -isuss OSP5 route summariBation an- three
a--ressing options/
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
Separate network num9ers ,or eah area
Network *n,ormation Center =N*C>-authoriBe- a--ress areas reate- using 9it-wise
su9netting an- V"SM
Pri.ate a--ressing: with a J-emilitariBe- BoneJ =+ML> 9u,,er to the o,,iial *nternet
worl-
Note/ Mou shoul- keep your a--ressing sheme as simple as possi9le: 9ut 9e wary o,
o.ersimpli,ying your a--ress assignment sheme$ !lthough simpliity in a--ressing sa.es
time later when operating an- trou9leshooting your network: taking short uts an ha.e
ertain se.ere onse<uenes$ *n 9uil-ing a sala9le a--ressing en.ironment: use a struture-
approah$ *, neessary: use 9it-wise su9netting---9ut make sure that route summariBation an
9e aomplishe- at the area 9or-er routers$
OSPF Route Summari?ation
1oute summariBation is e;tremely -esira9le ,or a relia9le an- sala9le OSP5 internetwork$
0he e,,eti.eness o, route summariBation: an- your OSP5 implementation in general: hinges
on the a--ressing sheme that you a-opt$ SummariBation in an OSP5 internetwork ours
9etween eah area an- the 9ak9one area$ SummariBation must 9e on,igure- manually in
OSP5$
Ehen planning your OSP5 internetwork: onsi-er the ,ollowing issues/
8e sure that your network a--ressing sheme is on,igure- so that the range o, su9nets
assigne- within an area is ontiguous$
Create an a--ress spae that will permit you to split areas easily as your network grows$ *,
possi9le: assign su9nets aor-ing to simple otet 9oun-aries$ *, you annot assign
a--resses in an easy-to-remem9er an- easy-to--i.i-e manner: 9e sure to ha.e a thoroughly
-e,ine- a--ressing struture$ *, you know how your entire a--ress spae is assigne- =or
will 9e assigne->: you an plan ,or hanges more e,,eti.ely$
Plan ahea- ,or the a--ition o, new routers to your OSP5 en.ironment$ 8e sure that new
routers are inserte- appropriately as area: 9ak9one: or 9or-er routers$ 8eause the a--ition
o, new routers reates a new topology: inserting new routers an ause une;pete- routing
hanges =an- possi9ly per,ormane hanges> when your OSP5 topology is reompute-$
Separate %ddress Structures 6or Eac& %rea
One o, the simplest ways to alloate a--resses in OSP5 is to assign a separate network
num9er ,or eah area$ Eith this sheme: you reate a 9ak9one an- multiple areas: an-
assign a separate *P network num9er to eah area$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
0he ,ollowing are some lear 9ene,its o, assigning separate a--ress strutures to eah area/
!--ress assignment is relati.ely easy to remem9er$
Con,iguration o, routers is relati.ely easy an- mistakes are less likely$
Network operations are streamline- 9eause eah area has a simple: uni<ue network
num9er$
Bit@<ise Subnettin' and $LS8
8it-wise su9netting an- .aria9le-length su9network masks =V"SMs> an 9e use- in
om9ination to sa.e a--ress spae$ Consi-er a hypothetial network where a Class 8 a--ress
is su9-i.i-e- using an area mask an- -istri9ute- among #D areas$
Route Summari?ation ec&niAues
1oute summariBation is partiularly important in an OSP5 en.ironment 9eause it inreases
the sta9ility o, the network$ *, route summariBation is 9eing use-: routes within an area that
hange -o not nee- to 9e hange- in the 9ak9one or in other areas$
1oute summariBation a--resses two important <uestions o, route in,ormation -istri9ution/
Ehat in,ormation -oes the 9ak9one nee- to know a9out eah areaN 0he answer to this
<uestion ,ouses attention on area-to-9ak9one routing in,ormation$
Ehat in,ormation -oes eah area nee- to know a9out the 9ak9one an- other areasN 0he
answer to this <uestion ,ouses attention on 9ak9one-to-area routing in,ormation$
%rea@to@Bac/bone Route %d"ertisement
0here are se.eral key onsi-erations when setting up your OSP5 areas ,or proper
summariBation/
OSP5 route summariBation ours in the area 9or-er routers$
OSP5 supports V"SM: so it is possi9le to summariBe on any 9it 9oun-ary in a network or
su9net a--ress$
OSP5 re<uires manual summariBation$ !s you -esign the areas: you nee- to -etermine
summariBation at eah area 9or-er router$
Bac/bone@to@%rea Route %d"ertisement
0here are ,our potential types o, routing in,ormation in an area/
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
+e,ault$ *, an e;pliit route annot 9e ,oun- ,or a gi.en *P network or su9network: the
router will ,orwar- the paket to the -estination spei,ie- in the -e,ault route$
*ntra-area routes$ 6;pliit network or su9net routes must 9e arrie- ,or all networks or
su9nets insi-e an area$
*nter-area routes$ !reas may arry e;pliit network or su9net routes ,or networks or
su9nets that are in this !S 9ut not in this area$
6;ternal routes$ Ehen -i,,erent !SAs e;hange routing in,ormation: the routes they
e;hange are re,erre- to as e;ternal routes$
*n general: it is -esira9le to restrit routing in,ormation in any area to the minimal set that the
area nee-s$
0here are three types o, areas: an- they are -e,ine- in aor-ane with the routing
in,ormation that is use- in them/
Non-stu9 areas---Non-stu9 areas arry a -e,ault route: stati routes: intra-area routes:
inter-area routes an- e;ternal routes$ !n area must 9e a non-stu9 area when it ontains a
router that uses 9oth OSP5 an- any other protool: suh as the 1outing *n,ormation
Protool =1*P>$ Suh a router is known as an autonomous system 9or-er router =!S81>$
!n area must also 9e a non-stu9 area when a .irtual link is on,igure- aross the area$
Non-stu9 areas are the most resoure-intensi.e type o, area$
Stu9 areas---Stu9 areas arry a -e,ault route: intra-area routes an- inter-area routes: 9ut
they -o not arry e;ternal routes$ Stu9 areas are reommen-e- ,or areas that ha.e only
one area 9or-er router an- they are o,ten use,ul in areas with multiple area 9or-er routers$
See JControlling *nter-area 0ra,,i:J later in this hapter ,or a -etaile- -isussion o, the
-esign tra-e-o,,s in areas with multiple area 9or-er routers$ 0here are two restritions on
the use o, stu9 areas/ .irtual links annot 9e on,igure- aross them: an- they annot
ontain an !S81$
Stu9 areas without summaries---So,tware releases 3$#=##>: 3$)#=)>: an- #%$%=#> an- later
support stu9 areas without summaries: allowing you to reate areas that arry only a
-e,ault route an- intra-area routes$ Stu9 areas without summaries -o not arry inter-area
routes or e;ternal routes$ 0his type o, area is reommen-e- ,or simple on,igurations
where a single router onnets an area to the 9ak9one$
OSPF Route Selection
Ehen -esigning an OSP5 internetwork ,or e,,iient route seletion: onsi-er three important
topis/
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
0uning OSP5 Metris
Controlling *nter-area 0ra,,i
"oa- 8alaning in OSP5 *nternetworks
unin' OSPF 8etrics
0he -e,ault .alue ,or OSP5 metris is 9ase- on 9an-wi-th$ 0he ,ollowing harateristis
show how OSP5 metris are generate-/
6ah link is gi.en a metri .alue 9ase- on its 9an-wi-th$ 0he metri ,or a spei,i link is
the in.erse o, the 9an-wi-th ,or that link$ "ink metris are normaliBe- to gi.e 5ast
6thernet a metri o, #$ 0he metri ,or a route is the sum o, the metris ,or all the links in
the route$
Note/ *n some ases: your network might implement a me-ia type that is ,aster than the
,astest -e,ault me-ia on,igura9le ,or OSP5 =5ast 6thernet>$ !n e;ample o, a ,aster me-ia is
!0M$ 8y -e,ault: a ,aster me-ia will 9e assigne- a ost e<ual to the ost o, an 5ast 6thernet
link---a link-state metri ost o, #$ 7i.en an en.ironment with 9oth 5ast 6thernet an- a ,aster
me-ia type: you must manually on,igure link osts to on,igure the ,aster link with a lower
metri$ Con,igure any 5ast 6thernet link with a ost greater than #: an- the ,aster link with a
ost less than the assigne- 5ast 6thernet link ost$ 4se the ?ip osp, ost@ inter,ae
on,iguration omman- to mo-i,y link-state ost$
Ehen route summariBation is ena9le-: OSP5 uses the metri o, the 9est route in the
summary$
0here are two ,orms o, e;ternal metris/ type # an- type )$ 4sing an e;ternal type #
metri results in routes a--ing the internal OSP5 metri to the e;ternal route metri$
6;ternal type ) metris -o not a-- the internal metri to e;ternal routes$ 0he e;ternal
type # metri is generally pre,erre-$ *, you ha.e more than one e;ternal onnetion: either
metri an a,,et how multiple paths are use-$
Controllin' Inter@area ra66ic
Ehen an area has only a single area 9or-er router: all tra,,i that -oes not 9elong in the area
will 9e sent to the area 9or-er router$
*n areas that ha.e multiple area 9or-er routers: two hoies are a.aila9le ,or tra,,i that nee-s
to lea.e the area/
4se the area 9or-er router losest to the originator o, the tra,,i$ =0ra,,i lea.es the area
as soon as possi9le$>
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
4se the area 9or-er router losest to the -estination o, the tra,,i$ =0ra,,i lea.es the area
as late as possi9le$>
*, the area 9or-er routers inHet only the -e,ault route: the tra,,i goes to the area 9or-er
router that is losest to the soure o, the tra,,i$ 7enerally: this 9eha.ior is -esira9le 9eause
the 9ak9one typially has higher 9an-wi-th lines a.aila9le$ Howe.er: i, you want the tra,,i
to use the area 9or-er router that is nearest the -estination =so that tra,,i lea.es the area as
late as possi9le>: the area 9or-er routers shoul- inHet summaries into the area instea- o, Hust
inHeting the -e,ault route$
Most network -esigners pre,er to a.oi- asymmetri routing =that is: using a -i,,erent path ,or
pakets that are going ,rom ! to 8 than ,or those pakets that are going ,rom 8 to !$> *t is
important to un-erstan- how routing ours 9etween areas to a.oi- asymmetri routing$
Load Balancin' in OSPF Internet=or/s
*nternetwork topologies are typially -esigne- to pro.i-e re-un-ant routes in or-er to
pre.ent a partitione- network$ 1e-un-any is also use,ul to pro.i-e a--itional 9an-wi-th ,or
high tra,,i areas$ *, e<ual-ost paths 9etween no-es e;ist: Ciso routers automatially loa-
9alane in an OSP5 en.ironment$
OSPF Con"er'ence
One o, the most attrati.e ,eatures a9out OSP5 is the a9ility to <uikly a-apt to topology
hanges$
0here are two omponents to routing on.ergene/
+etetion o, topology hanges---OSP5 uses two mehanisms to -etet topology hanges$
*nter,ae status hanges =suh as arrier ,ailure on a serial link> is the ,irst mehanism$
0he seon- mehanism is ,ailure o, OSP5 to reei.e a hello paket ,rom its neigh9or
within a timing win-ow alle- a -ea- timer$ One this timer e;pires: the router assumes
the neigh9or is -own$ 0he -ea- timer is on,igure- using the ip osp, -ea--inter.al
inter,ae on,iguration omman-$ 0he -e,ault .alue o, the -ea- timer is ,our times the
.alue o, the Hello inter.al$ 0hat results in a -ea- timer -e,ault o, (% seon-s ,or
9roa-ast networks an- ) minutes ,or non9roa-ast networks$
1ealulation o, routes---One a ,ailure has 9een -etete-: the router that -etete- the
,ailure sen-s a link-state paket with the hange in,ormation to all routers in the area$ !ll
the routers realulate all o, their routes using the +ykstra =or SP5> algorithm$ 0he time
re<uire- to run the algorithm -epen-s on a om9ination o, the siBe o, the area an- the
num9er o, routes in the -ata9ase$
OSPF Net=or/ Scalability
Mour a9ility to sale an OSP5 internetwork -epen-s on your o.erall network struture an-
a--ressing sheme$ !s outline- in the pree-ing -isussions onerning network topology
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
an- route summariBation: a-opting a hierarhial a--ressing en.ironment an- a struture-
a--ress assignment will 9e the most important ,ators in -etermining the sala9ility o, your
internetwork$
Network sala9ility is a,,ete- 9y operational an- tehnial onsi-erations/
Operationally: OSP5 networks shoul- 9e -esigne- so that areas -o not nee- to 9e split to
aommo-ate growth$ !--ress spae shoul- 9e reser.e- to permit the a--ition o, new
areas$
0ehnially: saling is -etermine- 9y the utiliBation o, three resoures/ memory: CP4:
an- 9an-wi-th$
8emory
!n OSP5 router stores all o, the link states ,or all o, the areas that it is in$ *n a--ition: it an
store summaries an- e;ternals$ Care,ul use o, summariBation an- stu9 areas an re-ue
memory use su9stantially$
CP9
!n OSP5 router uses CP4 yles whene.er a link-state hange ours$ Keeping areas small
an- using summariBation -ramatially re-ues CP4 use an- reates a more sta9le
en.ironment ,or OSP5$
Band=idt&
OSP5 sen-s partial up-ates when a link-state hange ours$ 0he up-ates are ,loo-e- to all
routers in the area$ *n a <uiet network: OSP5 is a <uiet protool$ *n a network with su9stantial
topology hanges: OSP5 minimiBes the amount o, 9an-wi-th use-$
OSPF Security
0wo kin-s o, seurity are applia9le to routing protools/
Controlling the routers that partiipate in an OSP5 network
OSP5 ontains an optional authentiation ,iel-$ !ll routers within an area must agree on the
.alue o, the authentiation ,iel-$ 8eause OSP5 is a stan-ar- protool a.aila9le on many
plat,orms: inlu-ing some hosts: using the authentiation ,iel- pre.ents the ina-.ertent
startup o, OSP5 in an unontrolle- plat,orm on your network an- re-ues the potential ,or
insta9ility$
Controlling the routing in,ormation that routers e;hange
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
!ll routers must ha.e the same -ata within an OSP5 area$ !s a result: it is not possi9le to use
route ,ilters in an OSP5 network to pro.i-e seurity$
*.0 EI+$P
0he 6nhane- *nterior 7ateway 1outing Protool =6nhane- *71P> is a routing protool
-e.elope- 9y Ciso Systems an- intro-ue- with So,tware 1elease 3$)# an- Ciso
*nternetworking Operating System =Ciso *OS> So,tware 1elease #%$%$ 6nhane- *71P
om9ines the a-.antages o, -istane .etor protools: suh as *71P: with the a-.antages o,
link-state protools: suh as Open Shortest Path 5irst =OSP5>$ 6nhane- *71P uses the
+i,,using 4p-ate !lgorithm =+4!"> to ahie.e on.ergene <uikly$
6nhane- *71P inlu-es support ,or *P: No.ell NetEare: an- !pple0alk$ 0he -isussion on
6nhane- *71P o.ers the ,ollowing topis/
6nhane- *71P Network 0opology
6nhane- *71P !--ressing
6nhane- *71P 1oute SummariBation
6nhane- *71P 1oute Seletion
6nhane- *71P Con.ergene
6nhane- *71P Network Sala9ility
6nhane- *71P Seurity
En&anced IGRP Net=or/ opolo'y
6nhane- *71P uses a nonhierarhial =or ,lat> topology 9y -e,ault$ 6nhane- *71P
automatially summariBes su9net routes o, -iretly onnete- networks at a network num9er
9oun-ary$ 0his automati summariBation is su,,iient ,or most *P networks$ See the setion
J6nhane- *71P 1oute SummariBationJ later in this hapter ,or more -etail$
En&anced IGRP %ddressin'
0he ,irst step in -esigning an 6nhane- *71P network is to -ei-e on how to a--ress the
network$ *n many ases: a ompany is assigne- a single N*C a--ress =suh as a Class 8
network a--ress> to 9e alloate- in a orporate internetwork$ 8it-wise su9netting an-
.aria9le-length su9network masks =V"SMAs> an 9e use- in om9ination to sa.e a--ress
spae$ 6nhane- *71P ,or *P supports the use o, V"SMAs$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
En&anced IGRP Route Summari?ation
Eith 6nhane- *71P: su9net routes o, -iretly onnete- networks are automatially
summariBe- at network num9er 9oun-aries$ *n a--ition: a network a-ministrator an
on,igure route summariBation at any inter,ae with any 9it 9oun-ary: allowing ranges o,
networks to 9e summariBe- ar9itrarily$
En&anced IGRP Route Selection
1outing protools ompare route metris to selet the 9est route ,rom a group o, possi9le
routes$ 0he ,ollowing ,ators are important to un-erstan- when -esigning an 6nhane- *71P
internetwork$
6nhane- *71P uses the same .etor o, metris as *71P$ Separate metri .alues are assigne-
,or 9an-wi-th: -elay: relia9ility an- loa-$ 8y -e,ault: 6nhane- *71P omputes the metri
,or a route 9y using the minimum 9an-wi-th o, eah hop in the path an- a--ing a me-ia-
spei,i -elay ,or eah hop$ 0he metris use- 9y 6nhane- *71P are as ,ollows/
Band=idt&-8an-wi-th is -e-ue- ,rom the inter,ae type$ 8an-wi-th an 9e mo-i,ie-
with the 9an-wi-th omman-$
Delay-6ah me-ia type has a propagation -elay assoiate- with it$ Mo-i,ying -elay is
.ery use,ul to optimiBe routing in network with satellite links$ +elay an 9e mo-i,ie-
with the -elay omman-$
Reliability-1elia9ility is -ynamially ompute- as a rolling weighte- a.erage o.er ,i.e
seon-s$
Load-"oa- is -ynamially ompute- as a rolling weighte- a.erage o.er ,i.e seon-s$
Ehen 6nhane- *71P summariBes a group o, routes: it uses the metri o, the 9est route in
the summary as the metri ,or the summary$
En&anced IGRP Con"er'ence
6nhane- *71P implements a new on.ergene algorithm known as +4!" =+i,,using
4p-ate !lgorithm>$ +4!" uses two tehni<ues that allow 6nhane- *71P to on.erge .ery
<uikly$ 5irst: eah 6nhane- *71P router stores its neigh9ors routing ta9les$ 0his allows the
router to use a new route to a -estination instantly i, another ,easi9le route is known$ *, no
,easi9le route is known 9ase- upon the routing in,ormation pre.iously learne- ,rom its
neigh9ors: a router running 6nhane- *71P 9eomes ati.e ,or that -estination an- sen-s a
<uery to eah o, its neigh9ors asking ,or an alternate route to the -estination$ 0hese <ueries
propagate until an alternate route is ,oun-$ 1outers that are not a,,ete- 9y a topology hange
remain passi.e an- -o not nee- to 9e in.ol.e- in the <uery an- response$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
! router using 6nhane- *71P reei.es ,ull routing ta9les ,rom its neigh9ors when it ,irst
ommuniates with the neigh9ors$ 0herea,ter: only hanges to the routing ta9les are sent an-
only to routers that are a,,ete- 9y the hange$ ! suessor is a neigh9oring router that is
urrently 9eing use- ,or paket ,orwar-ing: pro.i-es the least ost route to the -estination:
an- is not part o, a routing loop$ *n,ormation in the routing ta9le is 9ase- on ,easi9le
suessors$ 5easi9le suessor routes an 9e use- in ase the e;isting route ,ails$ 5easi9le
suessors pro.i-e the ne;t least-ost path without intro-uing routing loops$
0he routing ta9le keeps a list o, the ompute- osts o, reahing networks$ 0he topology ta9le
keeps a list o, all routes a-.ertise- 9y neigh9ors$ 5or eah network: the router keeps the real
ost o, getting to that network an- also keeps the a-.ertise- ost ,rom its neigh9or$ *n the
e.ent o, a ,ailure: on.ergene is instant i, a ,easi9le suessor an 9e ,oun-$ ! neigh9or is a
,easi9le suessor i, it meets the ,easi9ility on-ition set 9y +4!"$ +4!" ,in-s ,easi9le
suessors 9y the per,orming the ,ollowing omputations/
En&anced IGRP Net=or/ Scalability
Network sala9ility is limite- 9y two ,ators/ operational issues an- tehnial issues$
Operationally: 6nhane- *71P pro.i-es easy on,iguration an- growth$ 0ehnially:
6nhane- *71P uses resoures at less than a linear rate with the growth o, a network$
8emory
! router running 6nhane- *71P stores all routes a-.ertise- 9y neigh9ors so that it an a-apt
<uikly to alternate routes$ 0he more neigh9ors a router has: the more memory a router uses$
6nhane- *71P automati route aggregation 9oun-s the routing ta9le growth naturally$
!--itional 9oun-ing is possi9le with manual route aggregation$
CP9
6nhane- *71P uses the +4!" algorithm to pro.i-e ,ast on.ergene$ +4!" re-omputes
only routes: whih are a,,ete- 9y a topology hange$ +4!" is not omputationally
omple;: so it -oes not re<uire a lot o, CP4$
Band=idt&
6nhane- *71P uses partial up-ates$ Partial up-ates are generate- only when a hange
oursO only the hange- in,ormation is sent: an- this hange- in,ormation is sent only to the
routers a,,ete-$ 8eause o, this: 6nhane- *71P is .ery e,,iient in its usage o, 9an-wi-th$
Some a--itional 9an-wi-th is use- 9y 6nhane- *71PFs H6""O protool to maintain
a-Haenies 9etween neigh9oring routers$
En&anced IGRP Security
6nhane- *71P is a.aila9le only on Ciso routers$ 0his pre.ents ai-ental or maliious
routing -isruption ause- 9y hosts in a network$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
*n a--ition: route ,ilters an 9e set up on any inter,ae to pre.ent learning or propagating
routing in,ormation inappropriately$
,.0 -nalysis
Now that the <Client> re<uirements as well as the tehnial merits an- -own,alls o, the
routing protools ha.e 9een -e,ine- an analysis nee-s to 9e on-ute- o, this in,ormation$
0he Open Shortest Path 5irst Protool is an ?open stan-ar-$@ 0his means that it an 9e
implemente- on any plat,orm: ,rom any .en-or or manu,aturer$ 0his is an a-.antage o.er
6nhane- *nterior 7ateway Protool: whih is a proprietary stan-ar- ,rom Ciso$ Howe.er:
this is the only lear a-.antage o, OSP5 o.er 6*71P$
!s pre.iously state-: OSP5 is -esigne- primarily ,or hierarhial networks with a learly
-e,ine- 9ak9one area$ 0his is learly not the ase in the <Client> network$ *n a--ition:
when ompare- to 6*71P: OSP5 uses more 9an-wi-th to propagate its topology re<uires
more router CP4 time an- memory$ OSP5 is also more -i,,iult: an- there,ore more ostly:
to implement that 6*71P$
6nhane- *nterior 7ateway Protool is a proprietary routing protool -e.elope- 9y Ciso an-
use- e;lusi.ely in their routing pro-uts$ !lthough it is o,ten lumpe- in with OSP5 as a
link state protool: it is atually a hy9ri-O ontaining the 9est elements o, 9oth link state an-
-istane .etor protools$
6*71P: as state- pre.iously: has se.eral a-.antages o.er OSP5 when use- in the <Client>
network$ ! 9rie, summariBation o, these a-.antages inlu-e/
*mpro.e- router memory an- CP4 utiliBation when ompare- to OSP5
*ntelligent 9an-wi-th ontrol 6*71P takes into onsi-eration the a.aila9le 9an-wi-th
when -etermining the rate at whih it will transmit up-ates$ *nter,aes an also 9e
on,igure- to use a ertain =ma;imum> perentage o, the 9an-wi-th: so that e.en -uring
routing topology omputations: a -e,ine- portion o, the link apaity remains a.aila9le
,or -ata tra,,i$
6*71P -oes not re<uire a hierarhial network -esign to operate e,,iiently$ *t will
automatially summariBe routes where applia9le$
4nlike OSP5: whih only takes 9an-wi-th into onsi-eration when alulating the ost o,
a route: 6*71P an 9e on,igure- to use 9an-wi-th: -elay: relia9ility: an- loa- when
alulating optimum routes$ 0his has pro.en to 9e a .alua9le onsi-eration in a wireless
en.ironment$
6*71P has greater ontrol on timing issues: suh as hol- times an- hello inter.als: than
-oes OSP5$ 0his allows greater ,le;i9ility with wireless onnetions: where these
inter.als must 9e ,ine-tune- to a partiular -e.ie or 9an-wi-th$
6*71P is less omple; an- has less ost =manpower an- time> in.ol.e- in on,iguration
an- a-ministration$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
!lthough 6*71P is proprietary: it an ommuniate an- re-istri9ute routing in,ormation
with other routing protools: suh as OSP5$ 0his is aomplishe- through router
re-istri9ution or using an e;terior routing protool suh as 87P$
7i.en all o, this -ata an- analysis a ta9le is use- to onsoli-ate the issues an- synthesiBe
Issue EIGRP OSPF
6ase o, *mplementation 6asy: 9ut remem9er ?no
auto-summary@
Compliate-
Support o, *PG an-
!pple0alk
Mes No
Stan-ar-s-9ase- Ciso Proprietary *605 Open Stan-ar-
Hierarhial +esign No summary statements
on inter,aes
Mes hierarhy is part o,
the -esign
V"SM Support Mes Mes
Protool 0ype 6nhane- +istane Vetor "ink State
1outing Metris Com9ination o, 9an-wi-th:
-elay: relia9ility an- loa-
"ink
#%PC'*nter,aeQ8an-wi-th
CP4 1e<uirements "ower CP4 an- memory
re<uirements
Higher CP4 an- memory
re<uirements
Maturity Sine #3CD Sine #3CD
Sta9ility 6;ellent 6;ellent
0he ells that are highlighte- in green are attri9utes that are a-.antageous gi.en <Client>As
re<uirements$
..0 $ecommendation
"uent 0ehnologies Eorl-wi-e Ser.ies ,eels on,i-ent in strongly reommen-ing a
migration to 6nhane- *71P i, an all Ciso network is -eploye-$ OSP5 only supports *P
where as 6*71P supports *P: *PG: an- !pple 0alk$ 0he routers an 9e set up to support OSP5
,or *P an- 6*71P ,or *PG: 9ut it is not lear what a-.antage there woul- 9e to that
on,iguration$ 8ase- on the ,ollowing riteria/
Protools use- at <Client> =*P: *PG: 9ut no !pple0alk>
0he time an- e,,ort it takes to implement
1e<uirement ,or V"SM support
0ime to maintain an- support
Ciso .ersus !latel e<uipment
"uent 9elie.es that 6*71P an 9e implemente- muh <uiker than OSP5 as well as pro.i-e
the ,untionality that will pro.i-e the sta9iliBation <Client> is looking ,or$ !,ter
implementing 6*71P: an- <Client> still has a -esire to use OSP5: it an 9e aomplishe- in
a time ,rame that will 9e muh more managea9le 9eause the en.ironment will 9e more
sta9le$
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
!t this time: 6*71P is the lear hoie ,or the <Client> network$ *t is ,aster an- easier to
implement: it is more on,igura9le: an- per,orms 9etter in a wireless en.ironment$
/.0 $e#erences
/.1 0$1s
+esigning "arge Sale *P Networks/
http/''www$iso$om'uni.er-''t-'-o'isintwk'i-g('n-)%%&$htm
.1.1 !SP"
http/''www$iso$om'gi-9in'Support'PSP'pspQ.iew$plNpR*nternetworking/OSP5
http/''www$iso$om'uni.er-''t-'-o'isintwk'itoQ-o'osp,$htm
http/''www$iso$om'uni.er-''t-'-o'pro-ut'so,tware'ios#)%'#)gr'np#Q'#prt#'#os
p,$htm

Networkers )%%%/
http/''www$iso$om'networkers'nw%%'pres'S))%(
0rou9leshooting OSP5/
http/''www$iso$om'networkers'nw%%'pres'S))%D
.1.2 #$%RP
http/''www$iso$om'gi-9in'Support'PSP'pspQ.iew$plNpR*nternetworking/6*71P
http/''www$iso$om'uni.er-''t-'-o'isintwk'itoQ-o'enQigrp$htm
http/''www$iso$om'uni.er-''t-'-o'pro-ut'so,tware'ios#)%'#)gr'np#Q'#prt#'#eig
rp$htm
Networkers )%%%/
http/''www$iso$om'networkers'nw%%'pres'S))%C
http/''www$iso$om'networkers'nw%%'pres'S))%I
/.2 Boos
1outing 0CP'*P Volume * =CC*6 Pro,essional +e.elopment>: 9y Je,, +oyle: Ciso Press:
*S8N/ #2ICI%%(#C
EIGRP and OSPF Comparison
.2.1 !SP"
OSP5 Network +esign Solutions: 9y 0om 0homas: Ciso Press: *S8N/ #2ICI%%(D3
OSP5 !natomy o, an *nternet 1outing Protool: 9y John 0 Moy: !--ison Eesley: *S8N/
%)%#D&(I)(
.2.2 #$%RP
6*71P Network +esign Solutions/ 0he +e,initi.e 1esoure ,or 6*71P +esign: +eployment:
an- Operation
9y *.an PepelnHak: Ciso Press: *S8N/ #2ICI%#D2#
6*71P ,or *P/ 8asi Operation an- Con,iguration
9y !l.aro 1etana: et al: !--ison Eesley: *S8N/ %)%#D2II&)