EIGRP vs OSPF

Answered Question
Apr 7th, 2008

As i have read until now (monstly through cisco books, CCNA and CCNP) those prodocols are those that are suggested for using in your network. I use EIGRP in my network since all my devices are Cisco(also the switches). My network has now around 50 nodes and in 1-2 years for now it will reach the 100. Since OSPF has the areas which i don't know if i can do that with EIGRP what do you suggest about my network.

1. Do you suggest to use OSPF since my network is increasing and use areas?

2. Can i do that with EIGRP in a similar way, for examble differnt Autonomous System number?

3. In one area or AS what's the max number of nodes we should have ?

Thanks

moses

I have this problem too.
0 votes
Correct Answer by ruwhite about 8 years 7 months ago

Since these are two different types of protocols, the way they scale, and their scaling properties, are completely different. With OSPF, you need flooding domain boundaries to cut down on the information in the database, and to provide places where you can aggregate. With EIGRP, topology aggregation occurs at every hop, and route aggregation may be configured anyplace, so there's no need for flooding domain boundaries.

We see EIGRP networks, in a single AS, with up to 2000 routers, so you're nowhere near any sort of "router count limit" for EIGRP. In fact, IMHO, all the ideas of how large a network should get before you "switch protocols" ignore one basic point--scaling is dependent on design, not on the protocol itself.

You choose a routing protocol because of properties involving your business needs and how well the protocol meshes with your network design and maintenance practices, not because one will scale or converge faster than some other protocol.

HTH.

:-)

Russ

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 4.8 (4 ratings)
Loading.
noroutes4u Mon, 04/07/2008 - 06:47

With proper address summarization and using stub areas, eigrp should do fine. Are you on traditional campus design or on routed access? Remember, eigrp comes free with routed access design. We have a very very very large network, using routed access, with eigrp. It's working fine.

moses12315 Mon, 04/07/2008 - 07:01

Yes i use right ip address design and summarization. Also since most of my nodes are stub i use stub networks. I am not familiar with the terms "traditional campus design" and "routed access". Can you give me more information or link me to some information.

Thanks a lot

moses

noroutes4u Mon, 04/07/2008 - 07:27

Traditionally, you have a layer 2 trunk to your distribution and all of your access switches are layer 2. With the routed access design, all of your access switch are layer 3 and so are their connections up to the distribution. Let me send you the design docs to your email. It explains the advantages and disadvantage of both. It also breaks down the convergence time for both OSPF and EIGRP.

Correct Answer
ruwhite Mon, 04/07/2008 - 06:48

Since these are two different types of protocols, the way they scale, and their scaling properties, are completely different. With OSPF, you need flooding domain boundaries to cut down on the information in the database, and to provide places where you can aggregate. With EIGRP, topology aggregation occurs at every hop, and route aggregation may be configured anyplace, so there's no need for flooding domain boundaries.

We see EIGRP networks, in a single AS, with up to 2000 routers, so you're nowhere near any sort of "router count limit" for EIGRP. In fact, IMHO, all the ideas of how large a network should get before you "switch protocols" ignore one basic point--scaling is dependent on design, not on the protocol itself.

You choose a routing protocol because of properties involving your business needs and how well the protocol meshes with your network design and maintenance practices, not because one will scale or converge faster than some other protocol.

HTH.

:-)

Russ

Actions

This Discussion