On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Nick Olsen <nick@flhsi.com> wrote:
This is what I figured from a quick googling. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything..
you could employ one of the several methods to migrate from 'less desirable igp' to 'more desirable igp' on all of the things in question... there's people that have done this before even :)
Thanks!
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
---------------------------------------- From: "Nick Hilliard" <nick@foobar.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 1:03 PM To: nick@flhsi.com, nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: EIGRP support !Cisco
On 08/01/2014 17:52, Nick Olsen wrote:
Completely agree. But this is needed to integrate into an existing network. OSPF would've been my first choice.
you'll need to pay cisco tax then. Cisco opened up most of eigrp to the ietf as an informational rfc, but didn't release anything related to eigrp stub areas. This means that the ietf release is not that useful if a vendor wanted feature parity with cisco's implementation. So far I'm not aware of any vendors who have implemented it. Maybe some will do so in future.
Nick