The "right" protocol is going to depend on a lot of factors, including such things as what the predominate topology type is in your network, what sorts of management goals you have, what types of capabilities you need to address "edge conditions," (not the edge of the network, but the odd things that crop up in every network, and lay your best laid plans awry), how your addressing is structured, and other sorts of things.
I don't consider one protocol "better" than another, just "better suited" to a specific application. More specifics would require a lot more time/space than the forum permits. Look for a session at networkers this year on this topic, and also some information on it in a forthcoming Cisco Press title.
The main reason is that some people prefer to use a routing protocol that is non proprietary. This allows them to interoperate with other vendor. This would obviously not be the case with EIGRP. On the other hand if you have a Cisco only network, EIGRP is a good choice.
Both protocols have their advantages and disadvantages. In particular, either protocol will theoretically work equally well in the vast majority of networks out there and can scale to efficiently support networks with thousands of routers. However, each has weaknesses which can cause network meltdown if used inappropriately in a network of only a few dozen routers (although most design errors are not apparent until the network is up to a few hundred routers).
Primary weakness of EIGRP is its Cisco-only nature.
Primary weakness of OSPF is its CPU consumption, particularly in poorly designed networks.
Primary advantage of EIGRP is the ability to build a good sized network without bothering to plan ahead.
Primary advantage of OSPF is the ability to route based on knowledge of the state of links which are not adjacent.
Key to success with EIGRP is understanding "stuck in active" and "feasible successors."
Key to success with OSPF is understanding "routing areas" and "address summarization."
As always, YMMV, and my apologies to the purests for gross oversimplification :-)
[toc:faq]The ProblemOn traditional switches whenever we have a trunk
interface we use the VLAN tag to demultiplex the VLANs. The switch needs
to determine which MAC Address table to look in for a forwarding
decision. To do this we require the switch to do...
[toc:faq]Introduction:Netdr is a tool available on a RSP720, Sup720 or
Sup32 that allows one to capture packets on the RP or SP inband. The
netdr command can be used to capture both Tx and Rx packets in the
software switching path. This is not a substitut...
IntroductionOSPF, being a link-state protocol, allows for every router
in the network to know of every link and OSPF speaker in the entire
network. From this picture each router independently runs the Shortest
Path First (SPF) algorithm to determine the b...