Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:26:50 +1100 (EST) From: "Daniel O'Callaghan" <danny@panda.hilink.com.au> To: Scot Elliott <scot@poptart.org> Cc: akl@wup.de, amr@wup.de, isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RIP vs. OSPF Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.971119132323.235G-100000@panda.hilink.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971118142451.2837C-100000@homer.duff-beer.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 18 Nov 1997, Scot Elliott wrote: > Thei only thing I'd say about RIP is that it doesn't support subnetting. > This can be a problem.. for example, I used to use the class-A network > 10.0.0.0 as out intranet. But the routers using RIP could only broadcast > routes to the 10.0.0.0 network - not to any of the subnets - so you end up > having lots of static routes as a cludge and only one router out of each > subnet. Not nice. Not true. RIP v1 (Novell 3.1x) supports fixed-length subnets. That is, *all* subnets must have the same netmask. RIP v1 also assumes that all subnets of a network are contiguous, which is not necessarily so, these days. RIP v 2 supports variable-length subnet masks and remote subnets, but still is not as good as OSPF. I recommend going to OSPF and using default routes on the Novell gateways and static routes *to* the Novell gateways. Novell fileserver routing is pathetic, particularly 3.x. Danny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.971119132323.235G-100000>