On Saturday 27 December 2008 12:56:39 pm devang patel wrote:
Thanks for pointing out other good part of having CLNS as a transport for ISIS as a security point!
We've been happy with IS-IS, having migrated from OSPF ealrier on in the year. We like it because it lets us "stretch" the network without worrying about connectivity to the "backbone" area. However, as most others have said, go with what you're comfortable with. The knobs and switches really aren't that different nowadays, just a few fundamentals that you can easily use to decide which makes (more) sense to you. For v6, using a single routing protocol for both address families is not so bad (although running both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 really isn't a big deal, or bad thing, having done it at my previous employment and so on). For IS-IS, highly recommend MT to avoid any nasties while turning up v6 in a dual-stack environment. Cheers, Mark.