You are on page 1of 5

Select the right routing protocol for your network

By David "Davis CCIE, MCSE+I, SCSA" January 4, 2002, 8:00am PST

Many of us work on networks we didnt have the luxury of designingwith routing protocols we werent given the chance to choose. But you may be starting a new network, or you may have the opportunity to redesign your existing one. If you're tasked with selecting the best routing protocol for your network, which will you choose? While there is often a right tool for the job, all routing protocols have their strengths and weaknesses, and I dont believe that there is a clear-cut best routing protocol that is the right tool for every network. Thus, to help you select the most appropriate routing protocol for your network, I am going to examine the pros and cons of the best-known routing protocols and offer some guidance on when it makes sense to use one or the other. RIP V1Routing Information Protocol Origin: Based on RFC 1058 Type of protocol: Distance vector, based on the Bellman-Ford distance vector algorithm Metric: Hop count Methodology: Selects routers with the lowest hop count; updates other routers by broadcasting the entire routing table to all routers every 30 seconds Ideal topology: Smaller networks that arent very dynamic, have fewer than 15 hops, and are not subnetted from classful boundaries (see Weaknesses) Strengths:

Easy to configure and use Since it has been around so long, it is well known and widely used.

Weaknesses:

Limited to a hop count of 15; after a packet travels through 15 routers and still has another router to travel to, it will be discarded. Doesnt support a variable-length subnet mask (VLSM), which means that it sends routing updates based only on a fixed-length subnet mask (FLSM) or routes that fall on classful boundaries. So RIP V1 will not work with a network that has been subnetted beyond the normal /8, /16, /24 (255.0.0.0, 255.255.0.0, 255.255.255.0) or Class A, B, and C network boundaries. Converges slowly, especially on large networks

Doesnt have knowledge of the bandwidth of a link Doesnt support multiple paths for the same route Routing updates can require significant bandwidth, as the entire routing table is sent when a links status changes Prone to routing loops

RIP V2Routing Information Protocol Origin: Based on RFC 1388 Type of protocol: Distance vector, based on the Bellman-Ford distance vector algorithm Metric: Hop count Methodology: Selects routers with the lowest hop count; updates other routers by multicasting the entire routing table to all routers every 30 seconds Ideal topology: Smaller networks that arent very dynamic, have fewer than 15 hops Strengths:

Easy to configure and use Since it has also been around so long, it is well known and widely used. Version 2 adds support for VSLM or Classless Internet Domain Routing (CIDR), MD5 Authentication, and route summarization.

Weaknesses:

Limited to a hop count of 15; after a packet travels through 15 routers and still has another router to travel to, it will be discarded. Converges slowly, especially on large networks Doesnt have knowledge of the bandwidth of a link Doesnt support multiple paths for the same route Routing updates can require significant bandwidth as the entire routing table is sent when a links status changes Prone to routing loops

IGRPInterior Gateway Routing Protocol Origin: Based only on Ciscos implementation, not an Internet RFC Type of protocol: Distance vector, based on the Bellman-Ford distance vector algorithm Metric: Delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load Methodology: Sends hello packets every five seconds to neighbors to see if the neighbor is still available; updates other routers by notifying them only when routes change Ideal topology: Any network, small to very large; all routers must be from Cisco. Cannot

subnet network beyond classful boundaries. Strengths:


Easy to configure and use Uses the delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load of a link as its metric. This makes it very accurate in selecting the proper route.

Weaknesses:

Not an Internet standard; all routers must be from Cisco Systems Converges slowly; slower than RIP Doesnt support VLSM Prone to routing loops

Definition Convergence: The process that a routing protocol goes through to alert all routers on the network of the next available path when the primary path becomes unavailable.

EIGRPEnhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol Origin: Based only on Ciscos implementation, not an Internet RFC Type of protocol: Hybrid distance vector Metric: Delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load, using the Diffusing Update Algorithm (DUAL) Methodology: Sends hello packets every five seconds to neighbors (can interoperate with IGRP) to see if the neighbors are still available; updates other routers by notifying them only when routes change Ideal topology: Any network, small to very large; all routers must be Cisco Strengths:

Uses DUAL to provide very quick convergence and a loop-free network Supports IP and IPX Requires less CPU than OSPF (see next section) Requires little bandwidth for routing updates Supports VLSM or CIDR Uses the delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load of a link as its metric; this makes it very accurate in selecting the proper route Offers backward compatibility with IGRP

Weaknesses: Not an Internet standard; all routers must be from Cisco Systems

OSPF V2Open Shortest Path First [Note that version 1 of OSPF was never implemented.] Origin: Based on RFC 2328 Type of protocol: Link-state, runs the Dijkstra algorithm to calculate the shortest-path first (SPF) tree Metric: Calculates the cost to traverse router links to get to the destination, taking the bandwidth of the links into account Methodology: Develops adjacencies with its neighbors, periodically sending hello packets to neighbors, flooding changes to neighbors when a links status changes, and sending paranoia updates to neighbors every 30 minutes of all recent link state changes Ideal topology: Any network, small to very large Strengths:

Converges quickly, compared to a distance vector protocol Routing update packets are small, as the entire routing table is not sent Not prone to routing loops Scales very well to large networks Recognizes the bandwidth of a link, taking this into account in link selection Supports VLSM or CIDR Supports a long list of optional features that many of the other protocols do not

Weaknesses: More complex to configure and understand than a distance vector protocol Final word Just to clarify this comparison, one way routing protocols are classified is according to how they are used. Interior routing protocols are used within a single domain on your interior network. Also called an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), this is the type of routing protocol you usually think of using for your internal network. The protocols we looked at in this article are all IGPs. Note that I omitted a few of the lesser-known interior routing protocols to keep the discussion reasonably short. These include IS-IS, NLSP, RTMP, and IPX RIP. Another type of routing protocol is an exterior routing protocol, or Exterior Gateway Protocol (EGP). These protocols maintain routing information for networks that are external to your network. An EGP doesnt know how to deliver data within your network, just how to deliver data outside your network. While a variety of IGPs are currently used, about the only EGP in use today is the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). This is the routing protocol of the Internet. From talking with administrators who manage a variety of networks, the consensus is that OSPF is becoming the most popular interior routing protocol today. I would recommend OSPF or EIGRP for any new network, based on their popularity, flexibility, and fast convergence. Of course, the choice is yours based on the requirements of your network. This

article should help you get a better understanding of your options. Additional references

Cisco: An Introduction to IGRP Cisco: OSPF Design Guide Cisco Press: Routing TCP/IP Volume I, by Jeff Doyle Cisco Press: Routing TCP/IP Volume II, by Jeff Doyle Cisco Certification: Bridges, Routers, & Switches for CCIEs, by Andrew Bruce Caslow and Val Pavlichenko Network Computing: "Choosing an Interior Gateway Protocol" TechRepublic: "Should you use distance vector or link state routing protocols?" TechRepublic: "Administering EIGRP on Cisco Router Networks" RIP V1 RFC 1058 RIP V2 RFC 1388 OSPF V2 RFC 2328

You might also like