Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Ciprian Popoviciu
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 1
Is one protocol better than the others? Which
routing protocol should I use in my network?
Should I switch from the one I’m using? Do the
same selection rules apply to IPv4 and IPv6?
How will my IPv4 and IPv6 routing protocols
coexist?
IPv4
Ends
Merge
RST-3210 IPv6
11048_05_2005_X2
Presentation_ID © 2005
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Cisco
Inc. Systems,
All rights Inc. All rights
reserved. Ciscoreserved.
Confidential 22
The Questions
Is one routing protocol better Converges faster?
than any other protocol?
Uses less resources?
Define “Better!”
Easier to troubleshoot?
Easier to configure?
Scales to a larger number of
routers, routes, or neighbors?
More flexible?
Degrades more gracefully?
…
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 3
The Questions
The answer is yes if:
The network is complex
enough to “bring out” a
protocol’s specific advantages
You can define a specific
feature (or set of features) that
will benefit your network
tremendously…
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 4
The Questions
But, then again, the
answer is no!
Every protocol has
some features and not others,
different scaling
properties, etc.
Let’s consider some specific
topics for each protocol....
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 5
Before That … The Twist!
Most likely the IPv6 IGP will What is the impact on the
not be deployed in a brand convergence of IPv4?
new network and just by itself
How are the resources shared
Most likely the existing IPv4 between the two protocols?
services are more important at
Are the topologies going to be
first since they are generating
congruent?
most of the revenue
How easy is it to manage
Redefine “Better!”
parallel IPv4 / IPv6
environments?
Opportunity to adapt a new
IGP?
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 6
Which Routing Protocol
IPv4 and IPv6 IGPs
Convergence Speed
Design and Topology
Considerations
Summary
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 7
IPv4 and IPv6 IGPs
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 8
“IPv6 Is an Evolutionary Not a Revolutionary
Step and this is very clear in the case of
routing which saw minor changes even
though most of the Routing Protocols were
completely rebuilt.”
Presentation_ID © 2008
2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Cisco
Confidential
Public 9
The IPv4 – IPv6 Parallel
For all intents and purposes, the IPv6 IGPs are very similar to their IPv4
counterparts
IPv6 IGPs have additional features that could lead to new designs
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 10
The Version Agnostic Perspective
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 11
Convergence Speed
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 12
Convergence Speed
Equal Cost Convergence
Link State Convergence
EIGRP Convergence
Convergence Summary
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 13
Convergence Speed
Rules of Thumb
The more routers involved in convergence, the slower
convergence will be
The more routes involved in convergence, the slower
convergence will be
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 14
Convergence Speed
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 15
Equal Cost
Start with B>C>E and B>D>E
being equal cost A
If C fails, B and E can shift from
sharing traffic between C and D to B
sending traffic to D only
Number of routers involved in
convergence: 2 (B and E)
C D
Convergence time is in the
milliseconds
E
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 16
Link State
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 17
Link State
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 18
Link State – Convergence Data
Tuned IPv4 OSPF, Untuned IPv6 OSPF
Convergence time with default 2.500
Time
IPv6 OSPF
IPv4 and IPv6 IGP convergence 1.000 Linear (IPv4
Time
Time
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 19
Link State
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 20
EIGRP
For paths with feasible successors, convergence time is in the
milliseconds
The existence of feasible successors is dependant on the network
design
For paths without feasible successors, convergence time is
dependant on the number of routers that have to handle and reply
to the query
Queries are blocked one hop beyond aggregation and route filters
Query range is dependant on network design
Good design is the key to fast convergence in an EIGRP network
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 21
Convergence Summary
IPv4 IGP Convergence Data
IS-IS with default timers Routes
7000
Milliseconds
OSPF with default timers
6000
EIGRP without feasible
successors 5000
A 0
5000
4000
1000
2000
3000
B C
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 22
Convergence Summary
It’s possible to converge in under one second using any
protocol, with the right network design
Rules of Thumb:
More aggregation leads to better performance for EIGRP
Less aggregation leads to better performance for link state
protocols
If you’re going to use link state protocols, tune the timers; but if
you tune the timers, be careful with HA features, like GR/NSF
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 23
The Coexistence Twist
Tuned IPv4 OSPF, Untuned IPv6 OSPF
Time
Aggressive timers on both IGPs 0.25
0.2
IPv4 OSPF w/
IPv6 OSPF
0.15
will highlight competition for 0.1 Linear (IPv4
OSPF w/ IPv6
resources 0.05
0 OSPF)
Linear (IPv4
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 OSPF)
Tuned IPv4 ISIS, Tuned IPv6 ISIS Tuned IPv4 OSPF, Tuned IPv6 OSPF
0.6 0.7
0.5 0.6
0.5 IPv4 OSPF
0.4 IPv4 ISIS
0.4
Time
Time
0.3
IPv4 ISIS w/ 0.3 IPv4 OSPF w/
0.2 IPv6 ISIS IPv6 OSPF
0.2
0.1 Linear (IPv4 Linear (IPv4
0.1
ISIS w/ IPv6 OSPF w/ IPv6
0 ISIS) 0 OSPF)
Linear (IPv4 Linear (IPv4
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 ISIS) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 OSPF)
Number of Prefixes Number of Prefixes
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 24
Design and Topology
Considerations
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 25
Topology
Hub and Spoke
Full Mesh
Support for Hierarchy
Topology Summary
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 26
Hub and Spoke Summary
Scaling Issues
No effective means to control
All remote sites receive all other
Link distribution of routing information
remote site link state information;
State moderate scaling capability Care must be taken to prevent
transiting traffic through remote sites
Stub remote routers with filtering and
Care must be taken with summary
EIGRP aggregation; excellent scaling
black holes
capability
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 27
Hub and Spoke
In the field, we see up to 650
dual homed remotes with 12
Seconds
Tested initial convergence and
EIGRP
EIGRP
OSPF
OSPF
hard failover times 6
600 remotes
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 28
Full Mesh
Use ip ospf database-filter all out to Manually Designate
OSPF Flooding Points and Increase Scaling Through a Full Mesh
Use isis mesh-group or isis mesh-group blocked to Manually
IS-IS Designate Flooding Points and Increase Scaling Through a
Full Mesh
EIGRP Summarize into and out of the Full Mesh
Summarize
Summarize Summarize
Summarize Summarize
Summarize
New Information
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 29
Hierarchical Division Points
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 30
Topology Summary
Rules of Thumb
EIGRP performs better in large scale hub and spoke
environments
Link state protocols perform better in full mesh environments, if
tuned correctly
EIGRP tends to perform better in strongly hierarchical network
models, link state protocols in flatter networks
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 31
The Coexistence Twist
*Today most IPv6 IGPs are distinct from their IPv4 counterparts and will run
as ships in the night. The only exception is ISIS.
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 32
Protocol Evolution
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 33
OSPF Future Developments
Multitopology Routing
draft-ietf-ospf-mt
Address Families
To support IPv4 and IPv6 in OSPFv3
draft-ietf-ospfv3-af-alt and others
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 34
IS-IS Future Developments
Fast Reroute
Current work in the IETF
draft-bryant-shand-ipfrr-notvia-addresses and others
Multitopology Routing
draft-ietf-isis-wg-multi-topology
Administrative Tags
draft-ietf-isis-admin-tags
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 35
EIGRP Future Developments
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 36
Summary
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 37
Is one protocol better than the others? Which routing
protocol should I use in my network? Should I switch
from the one I’m using? Do the same selection rules
apply to IPv4 and IPv6? How will my IPv4 and IPv6
routing protocols coexist?
IPv4
Ends
Merge
RST-3210 IPv6
11048_05_2005_X2
Presentation_ID © 2005
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Cisco
Inc. Systems,
All rights Inc. All rights
reserved. Ciscoreserved.
Confidential 38
38
Summary
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 39
Expertise (Intangible)
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 40
Standardization (Intangible)
Who’s standard?
OSPF: Standardized by the IETF
IS-IS: Standardized by the ISO and the IETF
EIGRP: “Cisco Standard!”
Standardization is a tradeoff:
Promises Interoperability
Larger number of eyes looking at problems and finding new
features
Politics often influence standards and causes compromises
New features are often difficult to push through standards
committees, slowing their release
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 41
IPv4/IPv6 Coexistence
Targeting parity is natural but 450000
Memory (bytes)
early phases of integration 300000
250000
IPv4
IPv6
200000
try a new design with IPv6. Look 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
IPv4 Unicast:
resources required by IPv6 ---------------
Route Source Routes Backup Deleted Memory (bytes)
connected 5 1 0 720
local 6 0 0 720
Take advantage of the IPv6 local SMIAP
static
1
0
0
0
0
0
120
0
ospf 200 3770 1 0 452520
addressing resources! Total 3782 2 0 454080
IPv6 Unicast:
---------------
Route Source Routes Backup Deleted Memory (bytes)
connected 3 1 0 592
local 4 0 0 592
ospf 200 3769 1 0 557960
Total 3776 2 0 559144
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 42
Summary
Flat Hierarchy
Link
EIGRP
State
Flat Aggregated
Presentation_ID © 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 43
Recommended Reading
BRKIPM-3301