OSPF vs. EIGRP

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by jimbo, Apr 1, 2005.

  1. jimbo

    jimbo Guest

    Thinking about switching from RIP to a contemporary protocol. OSPF
    seems to be the darling of the industry, but in many ways EIGRP seems a
    fine competitor, IF your shop is all Cisco routers. I note the
    following advantages to EIGRP.

    1 - Route summarization at bit level, and summarize at any router
    2 - True loop-free environment via DUAL (OSPF gets close, but can loop)
    3 - Quieter than OSPF on stable network. OSP must send link state
    database every 30 minutes
    4 - Although EIGRP can't be configured into areas, traffic can be
    bounded via autonomous system numbers
    5 - Unequal multi-path routing
    6 - Easier upgrade from IGRP since metrics are similar

    Do you agree / disagree? Thanx!
    jimbo, Apr 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. jimbo

    John Agosta Guest

    "jimbo" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Thinking about switching from RIP to a contemporary protocol. OSPF
    > seems to be the darling of the industry, but in many ways EIGRP seems a
    > fine competitor, IF your shop is all Cisco routers. I note the
    > following advantages to EIGRP.
    >
    > 1 - Route summarization at bit level, and summarize at any router



    EIGRP does have an advantage over OSPF in it's ability to sumarize routes.


    > 2 - True loop-free environment via DUAL (OSPF gets close, but can loop)


    I wouldn't put this into an 'advantage' category.
    Personally, I've never seen an OSPF "loop."
    EIGRP can get "sia."

    > 3 - Quieter than OSPF on stable network. OSP must send link state
    > database every 30 minutes


    Really not an issue, IMHO.


    > 4 - Although EIGRP can't be configured into areas, traffic can be
    > bounded via autonomous system numbers


    And manually redistributing between AS boundaries
    leaves a crack in the door for administrative snafu.

    > 5 - Unequal multi-path routing


    A valuable feature within the 'core,' or where there are multiple 'high
    speed' facilities in use.
    Can be bad when low speed facilities are installed in a route table.


    > 6 - Easier upgrade from IGRP since metrics are similar



    Non-issue.



    > Do you agree / disagree? Thanx!




    Eigrp requires a well thought out address scheme, with contiguous subnet
    space and route summarizatuion to avoid SIA.
    OSPF is a little more forgiving in this respect.

    Also, OSPF is a standard.

    For all the neat things EIGRP does, I'll stick with open standards, thank
    you.
    John Agosta, Apr 2, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. jimbo

    thrill5 Guest

    The other advantage of EIGRP is that is scales very well in large networks,
    with the caveat that you have a well thought out IP addressing scheme. With
    this in mind it is not necessary to create "routing areas" with EIGRP. My
    network consists of over 900 locations with approximately 1400 routers in a
    single EIGRP AS. Our network is extremely stable, but this is with a well
    thought out addressing scheme to optimize the use of summary routes and
    distribute lists to minimize the routing tables on low-end platforms. Our
    network has been on many occasions (due to mergers/acquisitions) both an
    OSPF and EIGRP network, and prefer EIGRP because IMHO it is easier to
    manage.

    Scott


    "John Agosta" <j_agosta@remove_wideopenwest.kom> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "jimbo" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Thinking about switching from RIP to a contemporary protocol. OSPF
    >> seems to be the darling of the industry, but in many ways EIGRP seems a
    >> fine competitor, IF your shop is all Cisco routers. I note the
    >> following advantages to EIGRP.
    >>
    >> 1 - Route summarization at bit level, and summarize at any router

    >
    >
    > EIGRP does have an advantage over OSPF in it's ability to sumarize routes.
    >
    >
    >> 2 - True loop-free environment via DUAL (OSPF gets close, but can loop)

    >
    > I wouldn't put this into an 'advantage' category.
    > Personally, I've never seen an OSPF "loop."
    > EIGRP can get "sia."
    >
    >> 3 - Quieter than OSPF on stable network. OSP must send link state
    >> database every 30 minutes

    >
    > Really not an issue, IMHO.
    >
    >
    >> 4 - Although EIGRP can't be configured into areas, traffic can be
    >> bounded via autonomous system numbers

    >
    > And manually redistributing between AS boundaries
    > leaves a crack in the door for administrative snafu.
    >
    >> 5 - Unequal multi-path routing

    >
    > A valuable feature within the 'core,' or where there are multiple 'high
    > speed' facilities in use.
    > Can be bad when low speed facilities are installed in a route table.
    >
    >
    >> 6 - Easier upgrade from IGRP since metrics are similar

    >
    >
    > Non-issue.
    >
    >
    >
    >> Do you agree / disagree? Thanx!

    >
    >
    >
    > Eigrp requires a well thought out address scheme, with contiguous subnet
    > space and route summarizatuion to avoid SIA.
    > OSPF is a little more forgiving in this respect.
    >
    > Also, OSPF is a standard.
    >
    > For all the neat things EIGRP does, I'll stick with open standards, thank
    > you.
    >
    >
    >
    thrill5, Apr 2, 2005
    #3
  4. >> "jimbo" <> wrote
    >>> Thinking about switching from RIP to a contemporary protocol. OSPF
    >>> seems to be the darling of the industry, but in many ways EIGRP seems a
    >>> fine competitor, IF your shop is all Cisco routers. I note the
    >>> following advantages to EIGRP.
    >>> * * *
    >>> Do you agree / disagree? Thanx!


    EIGRP versus OSPF has been hashed out in this newsgroup every couple
    of years for the past ten years... A quick search of Google News
    (try, for example, EIGRP versus OSPF) will turn up several well
    thought out threads which discuss the advantages and disadvantages
    of each.

    The bottom line is that for most networks there is no significant
    advantage to either, but there are a few pathological topologies
    where one or the other stumbles badly. For example, OSPF can have
    problems with large hub and spoke networks with high density hub
    routers and multiple links to each spoke. Similarly, EIGRP can be
    problematic if there are large numbers of alternate paths which
    can not be configured to be feasible successors.

    There is also the "obvious" limitation that whichever protocol is
    selected must be available on all routers you plan to use. Perhaps
    most important, neither protocol is "scaleable" if you don't
    understand each protocol's specific limitations and architect your
    network to avoid them.

    --
    Vincent C Jones, Consultant Expert advice and a helping hand
    Networking Unlimited, Inc. for those who want to manage and
    Tenafly, NJ Phone: 201 568-7810 control their networking destiny
    http://www.networkingunlimited.com
    Vincent C Jones, Apr 2, 2005
    #4
  5. jimbo

    Missiongeek

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1
    I just love reading posts like this.
    Missiongeek, Mar 24, 2009
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Sam Soh
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    8,000
    Sam Soh
    Aug 15, 2003
  2. Butch

    EIGRP and OSPF

    Butch, Jul 25, 2005, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,866
    jsalminen
    Jul 31, 2005
  3. dominix
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    9,299
  4. BG
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    6,697
  5. rsurf
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    3,928
Loading...

Share This Page