11 Nov
2016
11 Nov
'16
12:45 a.m.
On 10/Nov/16 23:53, Charles van Niman wrote:
I don't think Nick asked for a list, just one single thing, any one thing. To me at least, it doesn't really make sense to make the statement you did, without pointing out what can be done to improve the situation. I would be very interested to hear what network requirements are not being met with Juniper's current IS-IS implementation.
To be honest, none that I can think of. Many of the feature differences are vendor-specific, particularly with how you can further optimize IS-IS to handle LSP's flooding, flushing, re-calculation, throttling, e.t.c. Bottom line, Juniper fully supports the IS-IS spec., from what we see. Mark.