EIGRP Debated on the Interwebs – Unadulterated Nerdery

I would really like to put together a panel of USMC Chief Warrant Officers (CWOs) and have a dialogue about which routing protocol really is the best for the Marine Corps (EIGRP or OSPF). Prior to any good and productive dialogue you need a reading list and some background info. We’ve been formally trained on EIGRP in the schoolhouse via the Cisco Networking Academy and most of us have Routing TCP/IP vol 1 & 2 on the shelf. Outside of that, here are a couple of other interesting reads we will need:

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/16276

I chose this article because of the author, which I am sure you will recognize. Outside of hearing what Jeff Doyle has to say, take a look at the comments. The comment by Don Savage was particularly enlightening. Speaking of Don Savage:

http://blogs.cisco.com/getyourbuildon/eigrp-vs-ospf-take-2/

I chose this article because it is an excellent article and there is a lot of entertainment in the comments. They were not nearly as informative as the comments on the previous blog, but it is impressive the amount of flack Don Savage takes and responds very professionally and even answers the pot shots and snark. Snark leads into the next article:

http://etherealmind.com/response-eigrp-vs-ospf-take-2/

Greg Ferro, of packet pushers fame, wrote a response to the article previously cited. I chose this article not based on the content of his responses (which is good), but because it provides a bit of non-Cisco legitimacy (Jeff Doyle is a Cisco Press author, and Don Savage is a Cisco employee). I would also like to go into detail with the CWOs about the applicability of the last statement Greg makes:

I’m comfortable with OSPF. But only because the future of the network is multivendor – not at the network level but when interoperating with firewalls, mainframes, Linux-based appliances. performing route redistribution just to support EIGRP doesn’t make sense to me.

Specifically, will the Marine Corps ever be comfortable with these devices running a routing protocol?

If anyone out there knows of any other good links for the dialogue, I would love to hear from you.

Aaron Bauman says:

September 25, 2012 at 8:08 am

The only reasonable point in all of this is the ability of an organization to remain multi-vendor ready. Aside from this, the benefits of EIGRP for the Marine Corps are very clear and understood. As for redistribution, we should be running BGP on our edges when we decide to touch other networks, while this may not always be possible it is generally what happens and is recommended.

One key feature EIGRP provides us is unequal cost load balancing. This feature alone, if properly implemented, provides a great tactical edge when considering various transport paths provided to us. This serves a great point as well, some form of training is required regardless of which protocol we decide is right for us. Even the basically trained 0651 will hose an EIGRP implementation at least once.

There are so many good points to all of this but in the end it all comes down to training and the knowledgeable leadership making the proper decision on which protocol is best. My main concern would simply be how often and to what extent will we ever need to redistribute from one IGP to another IGP? Also, this goes back to understanding redistribution and proper planning.

john.schreiner says:

September 29, 2012 at 8:38 pm

Great comment. I hope to get into this during the discussion. I really don’t think there is a clearcut answer to this. Even taking something simple like summarization is a topic for debate. When working labs, I was always annoyed by OSPF only allowing summarization at the area level. From a simplicity standpoint, this is about impossible to mess up. EIGRP on the other hand, while being infinitely flexible with summarization, can lead to serious routing problems if you forget to summarize on EVEN ONE backside link.
Specifically to your question, I think we will see more and more redistribution as we continue to move forward (and add more “routers”). Technically, IP modems, tactical radios, firewalls and several other devices function as routers. Depending our your requirements and level of disdain for static routes, redistribution (IGP to IGP) could become standard on most of our networks.

PC Drew says:

September 30, 2012 at 8:24 pm

Subscribe to the Marine Corps Network Operators’ Group (MCNOG) and ask the question. I’ve got about 60 folks from throughout the Marine Corps ranging from Cpl to LtCol. Once you register, click on the Archives and you can see some previous discussions we’ve had on this very topic.

https://lists.army.mil/mailman/listinfo/mcnog

Also, in response to the previous comment about running BGP at our boundaries with other networks that we do not specifically administrate (i.e. between MEF and Division where they’re administratively managed by different organizations) is what we should be doing. I’m pushing this here at 9th Comm Bn as we speak.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply