From owner-freebsd-isp Tue Nov 18 18:27:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA17143 for isp-outgoing; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 18:27:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp) Received: from panda.hilink.com.au (panda.hilink.com.au [203.8.15.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17133 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 18:27:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from danny@panda.hilink.com.au) Received: (from danny@localhost) by panda.hilink.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA14258; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:26:51 +1100 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:26:50 +1100 (EST) From: "Daniel O'Callaghan" To: Scot Elliott cc: akl@wup.de, amr@wup.de, isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RIP vs. OSPF In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk 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