Running two routing protocols is too much of a hassle. I think I would rather use static routes, and synchronize routers using rsync, diff, and patch. Our NOC has several 286s running Xenix that could act as servers for this. This would eliminate the hassle of running OSPF, ISIS, or RIP. Does anyone know of a Tier-1 for under $30/Mbps that would run something like this instead of BGP? I'd love it if we didn't need any routing protocols. -Dalph Get your free encrypted email at https://www.hushmail.com
Running two routing protocols is too much of a hassle. I think I would rather use static routes, and synchronize routers using rsync, diff, and patch. Our NOC has several 286s running Xenix that could act as servers for this.
This would eliminate the hassle of running OSPF, ISIS, or RIP. Does anyone know of a Tier-1 for under $30/Mbps that would run something like this instead of BGP? I'd love it if we didn't need any routing protocols.
Why don't we dump IP routeing and have one big supernet on one big bridge peice of ethernet? Wouldn't life be simple! Regards, Neil. -- Neil J. McRae - Alive and Kicking neil@DOMINO.ORG
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Neil J. McRae wrote:
Running two routing protocols is too much of a hassle. I think I would rather use static routes, and synchronize routers using rsync, diff, and patch. Our NOC has several 286s running Xenix that could act as servers for this.
This would eliminate the hassle of running OSPF, ISIS, or RIP. Does anyone know of a Tier-1 for under $30/Mbps that would run something like this instead of BGP? I'd love it if we didn't need any routing protocols.
Why don't we dump IP routeing and have one big supernet on one big bridge peice of ethernet? Wouldn't life be simple!
This would appear to be the way things are moving actually in some ways.... think ethernet on MPLS, who needs connections to IXPs any more when we can all share one or have one big global IXP?! ;)
participants (3)
-
dalph＠hush.com -
neil＠DOMINO.ORG -
Stephen J. Wilcox