Re: BGP on dialup links? (was anyway)
Mike Horwath (drechsau@tiny.net)
Fri, 25 Jul 1997 10:34:03 -0500
On Thu, Jul 24, 1997 at 12:00:25PM -0400, Dick St.Peters had written:
> Scott Leonello writes:
> > On Wed, 23 Jul 1997, MegaZone wrote:
> >
> > > We are looking at OSPF over dial links, a good case has been built for that.
> >
> > what about just fixing the OSPF you have first? you never even reply to
> > the broken OSPF issues. i have a pool of 400 modems suffering from this
> > and livingston has nothing to say. i can make my routers ignore the BAD
> > CHECKSUMS but i cant make the portmasters ignore it. my network is flakey
> > as hell because of this. we have sent emails to support and to you,
> > we have called support and waited 4 days for someone to say "uh, well,
> > it is a problem with everything but us."
>
> >From our experience, Livingston OSPF works like a charm.
>
> We've been running OSPF since long before Livingston had it, and we
> now have a mixture of ciscos and PMs (both 2s and 3s) running OSPF at
> four POPs. We have yet to see a checksum problem.
>
> OSPF gets a workout on our network too - most of our users have static
> IPs, so most dialup connections add a route at the start and delete
> one at the end. A good many users route small subnets via their
> dialups; a lot of them call different POPs at different times.
I hate to say it, but mee too!!!! :)
We have found one issue with OSPF between Livingston and Cisco -
problems with authentication.
Nothing about checksum errors and things have been rock solid since we
implemented OSPF on our network.
(490 or so ports as of right now)
--
Mike Horwath IRC: Drechsau LIFE: Lover drechsau@yuck.net
Visi: info@visi.com drechsau@Geeks.ORG
Twin Cities area Internet Access: 612-288-0880 for more info
The founding member of Minn. Coalition for Internet Accessibility