General discussion

Locked

Why OSPF if I only have 2 routers

By Robert_Baratta-CW ·
My IT dept insists we run OSPF with only 2 routers. The routers are redundant backup for each other. Is the overhead and convergence time causing too much traffic and delaying fail over respectively. Exactly why is this not a good idea.

Thanks,
robert

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

3 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Why OSPF if I only have 2 ...

There is only one possible reason why it isn't a good idea and that is the cost of the second unnecessary router that most of the time wouldn't be in use or at best only in partial use.

The up side is that you have redundancy built in and if you have a router fail you keep going without a break in work.

For more information visit the following links for a complete explanation of this technology

http://tinyurl.com/a8spp

http://tinyurl.com/rbzw

http://tinyurl.com/7wq5y

http://tinyurl.com/g49eh

Those are only a few on the multitude of articles available on this subject and its benefits to any organisation. But if you are not worried about Down Time and missing important incoming E-Mails you can do without it as it really depends on what your business is and how much you can afford to loose to your competition if you are out of contact for any length of time.

Col

Collapse -

by BobTheITBuilder In reply to Why OSPF if I only have 2 ...

OSPF is a great routing protocol for large networks, however, since you only have two routers in the company you would be far better off using static routing as there is no overhead on the router processor.

Collapse -

by dplewis In reply to Why OSPF if I only have 2 ...

OSPF will be useful for you because it dynamically allows failover (resilient routing using static routes is often not possible as they don't understand what's happening downstream in a network. Are there other routers downstream of the two you mention?
Secondly OSPF converges much quicker than any flavour of RIP.
Finally, You don't describe your topology in detail but it would seem that a key component you don't mention is a Default Gateway resilience protocol - either HSRP (Cisco) or VRRP.
In short OSPF isn't that much more complicated to setup and run than RIP (though it has a greater CPU overhead on the router). I'd generally use OSPF, in preference to RIP any day.

Back to Networks Forum
3 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums