This blog covers the following topics:
- Stable and scalable routing designs for EIGRP for IPv4
- Stable and scalable routing designs for OSPF for IPv4
- Stable and scalable routing designs for BGP for IPv4
We cover these topics in the CCNP ENARSI course.
This chapter is essential for CCNP ENARSI certification and it will begin by reviewing some general routing concepts and aspects regarding route summarization. Next, it will analyze other routing topics, such as route filtering and redistribution. Finally, it will explore details and best practices that are essential for scalable routing designs when using EIGRP, OSPF, and BGP.
We cover routing basics in our free Network+ book if you need to brush up.
Concepts of Routing Protocols
Before analyzing details about each individual routing protocol, some general information about IP routing will be presented first. Network designers should know the key characteristics that different routing protocols have because they will be in a position to recommend specific routing protocols for different projects. The first key decision criteria is figuring out whether static or dynamic routing should be used. Static routing implies manually defining routes on devices and dynamic routing implies using a dedicated routing protocol that will build the routing table.
Even though static routes may not seem necessary in modern networks, there are situations in which they can offer granular control and optimization of the information learned by the routing protocols. Static routes can be used in conjunction with dynamic routing protocols to reach specific networks or to provide the default gateway (e.g., pointing to the ISP), which is useful in situations where the destination network is not part of the routing protocol database.
Another scenario in which static routes are used is to override some dynamically learned routing information. Static routing can also be used in the form of floating static routes, for example, setting the Administrative Distance (AD) of a particular static route to a higher (worse) value than the AD value of the same route learned via a routing protocol for failover reasons.
An important decision to be made when choosing the routing protocol is whether an Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (IGRP) or an Exterior Gateway Routing Protocol (EGRP) will be needed. When routing between devices within an organization (Autonomous System – AS), there are many IPv4-based IGRPs to choose from, such as the following:
Note: RIPv1 and IGRP are considered legacy protocols and some modern network devices do not support them.
On Demand Routing (ODR) is a Cisco proprietary protocol designed for hub-and-spoke topologies. It offers basic routing functionality and works over Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP). The most common interior protocols used in non-hub-and-spoke environments are RIPv2, OSPF, IS-IS, and EIGRP. IPv6 uses specially developed versions of routing protocols, such as the following:
- EIGRP for IPv6
Routing between ASs (from large corporations to the Internet, or between ISPs) is accomplished using special routing protocols called EGRPs. The most common EGRP for both IPv4 and IPv6 is the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). Some companies have a very complex and large network infrastructure that spans worldwide, so they use BGP inside their network as their IGRP.
Large networks, including the Internet, are based on the AS concept. An AS defines a group of network devices under a common administration, and most often this defines a large organization or an ISP. Routing protocols can be classified based on different criteria. Depending on the zone in which they operate, they can be considered interior (inter-AS) routing protocols or exterior (intra-AS) routing protocols. Interior routing protocols can be further classified as distance vector routing protocols and link-state routing protocols, based on their behavior regarding the router update exchange process. Each routing protocol type will be covered in detail in the following sections, along with their respective design considerations.
Interior Routing Protocols
Interior routing protocols are configured on groups of routers from the same AS; thus, the routing activity never leaves the organization’s premises.
Figure 5.1 – Routing Protocols
Figure 1 above illustrates the different routing protocols available. An important aspect that must be considered when selecting the routing protocol is the difference between distance vector and link-state routing protocols. Link-state routing protocols were developed after distance vector routing protocols and they are much more sophisticated. A special category involves the hybrid routing protocols that feature the best attributes of distance vector and link-state technologies. The only hybrid routing protocol used in modern networks is EIGRP.
Distance vector routing protocols include:
Link-state routing protocols include:
Distance Vector Routing Protocols
Distance vector routing is a property of certain routing protocols that build an internal picture of the topology by periodically exchanging full routing tables between the neighbor devices. The main difference between distance vector routing protocols and link-state routing protocols is the way they exchange routing updates. Distance vector routing protocols function using the “routing by rumor” technique, as every router relies on its neighbors to maintain correct routing information. This means the entire routing table is sent periodically to the neighbors, as illustrated in Figure 2 below:
Figure 2 – Distance Vector Routing Protocol Behavior
The most important advantage of distance vector routing protocols is that they are easy to implement and maintain. The downside is the convergence time. A converged network is a network in which every router has the same perspective of the topology. When a topology change occurs, the routers in the respective area propagate the new information to the rest of the network. Because this is done on a hop-by-hop basis (i.e., every router passes its fully updated routing information to each neighbor), network convergence is finally established after a significant amount of time has passed.
In addition to the downsie of slow convergence, because full routing table exchanges occur between the routers, distance vector routing protocols are more bandwidth intensive than link-state routing protocols are. This happens especially in large networks, where routing tables can be of considerable size. Based on these aspects, distance vector routing protocols are recommended only in small Enterprise Network implementations.
An example of a distance vector routing protocol still used in modern networks is RIPv2 (described in RFC 2453). RIPv2 uses a hop count as the metric for path selection, with a maximum hop count of 15. RIPv2 updates are sent using multicast by default, although they can be configured as unicast or broadcast, and, unlike its predecessor (RIPv1), RIPv2 permits Variable Length Subnet Masking (VLSM) on the network.
Devices receive routing information from their neighbors and pass it on to other neighbors. RIP repeats this process every 30 seconds. The downside in this scenario is that when the network is stable and there are no changes in the topology, RIP still sends its routing table every 30 seconds, which is not very effective because it wastes bandwidth.
Note: Although it is widely believed that all of the routing table information is exchanged between neighbors, actually only the best routes are exchanged through the routing updates. Alternate routes are not included in the routing update packets.
If a router that uses a distance vector routing protocol has inaccurate information, that information will propagate through the entire network. Distance vector routing protocols are prone to major problems, including routing loops.
Link-State Routing Protocols
Link-state routing protocols do not generally “route by rumor.” The routing devices exchange information about their link-states between them. Devices build a map of the network (i.e., they do not rely on a map of a particular node) independently and loop-free based on the link-state information each router generates and propagates to the other routers.
Unlike distance vector routing protocols, link-state routing protocols flood information about its links to a specific area or to all of the routers in a specific area. This way, every router in the topology has detailed knowledge of a specific area, unlike the routers using distance vector routing protocols, where only the best routes are exchanged between neighbors. The routing decisions are made by applying the Shortest Path First (SPF) or Dijkstra’s algorithm to the information received from various sources. The result of this calculation consists of the shortest path to each destination in the network.
Figure 3 – Link-State Routing Protocol Behavior
Figure 3 above illustrates link-state routing protocol behavior. This is a much more efficient approach to building routing databases, and there is no fixed updated timer like in the distance vector technologies case. Link-state protocols re-flood their entire routing information periodically to ensure that the network is properly converged.
Link-state routing protocols offer a series of important advantages compared to distance vector routing protocols. The most important advantage relates to the convergence factor. Convergence occurs much faster because as soon as a network topology changes, only that specific information is sent to the routers in a given area. The routing updates stop after all of the routers learn about the specific change, thus decreasing the need for bandwidth, unlike with distance vector routing protocols that periodically exchange routing tables, even if no topology change occurs. In link-state routing, updates are triggered only when a link-state changes somewhere in the network. Depending on the routing protocol used, this can mean a link going up or down or changing some of its parameters (e.g., bandwidth).
Examples of link-state routing protocols are OSPF (Open Shortest Path First), described in RFC 2328, and IS-IS (Intermediate System-to-Intermediate System), described in RFC 1142.
Note: An interesting and special routing protocol is EIGRP (Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol), a Cisco proprietary protocol. It has both distance vector and link-state characteristics. It is also called a hybrid or an advanced distance vector routing protocol.
Exterior Routing Protocols
Exterior routing protocols run between ASs and the most common example is BGPv4. The main reason to use different types of routing protocols to carry routes outside of the AS boundaries is to exchange a large amount of route entries. In this regard, exterior routing protocols support special options and features that are used to implement various policies. The routing metrics for these kinds of protocols include more parameters than for interior routing protocols because of the need for flexible routing policies and choosing the best possible path.
While interior routing protocols are used within Enterprise Networks, BGP is typically used in ISP-to-ISP or ISP-to-Enterprise connections. Unlike intra-AS protocols that make routing decisions based exclusively on the metric value, the policies for inter-AS protocols can also include other factors, such as business decisions or possible AS vulnerabilities (e.g., monetary costs, preferred provider, non-secure provider, geographical traffic path, and others). These are technically implemented by configuring different BGP parameters.
A typical scenario in which the use of BGP is beneficial because of its flexible policy implementation is an organization that is connected to multiple ISPs (multi-homing). BGP can interconnect with any interior routing protocol used inside the Enterprise Network, so administrators have maximum flexibility when it comes to choosing a suitable interior routing protocol. A simple example of this scenario is presented in Figure 4 below:
Figure 4 – Enterprise Multi-Homing Scenario
Other Considerations for Routing Protocols
Another key parameter of routing protocols and a measure of their sophistication is whether they have a hierarchical or a flat behavior. IS-IS and OSPF and can be configured in a hierarchical manner and they offer improved scalability. For example, OSPF splits the topology into multiple areas and uses the Area 0 (backbone) concept, which connects to every other area in the topology. Routes can be summarized as they enter or leave the backbone, which leads to increased efficiency and bandwidth optimization. IGRP and RIP are examples of routing protocols that are based on a flat behavior because they are not optimized and they use a single structure, no matter how large the network is.
One task for the router is choosing the best way to get to a destination. If a router learns different paths to a destination from different protocols, the router must decide which prefix it should listen to. To make this decision it uses Administrative Distance (AD). Lower AD values are preferred over higher AD values, so, for example, OSPF routes (AD=110) will be preferred over RIP routes (AD=120). The AD value represents how trustworthy a particular routing protocol is. The most common AD values are summarized below:
|Static Pointing at IP Address
The AD is the way a router selects a route based on one protocol over another, but something else that must be decided is the way in which the device will select a routing table entry over another entry from the same protocol. Routing protocol metrics are used to make this decision.
Different routing protocols use different metrics. RIP uses the hop count as a metric, selecting the best route based on the lowest number of routers it passed through. This is not very efficient because the shortest path can have a lower bandwidth than other paths. OSPF is more evolved and takes bandwidth into consideration, creating a metric called cost. Cost is directly generated from the bandwidth value, so a low bandwidth has a high cost and a high bandwidth has a low cost.
EIGRP is even more sophisticated and uses a composite metric, considering both bandwidth and delay values to create the metric value. BGP, the most sophisticated of all, uses many different attributes grouped in path vectors that can be used to calculate the best path.
Note: One of the reasons RIP has a high AD value is that it uses the hop count metric, which is not very efficient in complex environments. The more sophisticated the metric calculation is, the lower the AD value assigned to different routing protocols.
Routing Problems and Avoidance Mechanisms
As mentioned, distance vector routing protocols are prone to major problems as a result of their simplistic “routing by rumor” approach. Distance vector and link-state routing protocols use different techniques to prevent routing problems. The most important mechanisms are as follows:
- Invalid timers: These are used to mark routes as unreachable when updates for those routes are not received for a long time.
- Hop-count limit: This parameter marks routes as unreachable when they are more than a predefined number of hops away. The hop-count limit for RIP is 15, as it is not usually used in large networks. Unreachable routes are not installed in the routing table as best routes. The hop-count limit prevents updates from looping in the network, just like the TTL field in the IP header.
- Triggered updates: This feature allows the update timer to be bypassed in the case of important updates. For example, the RIP 30-second timer can be ignored if a critical routing update must be propagated through the network.
- Hold down timers: If a metric for a particular route keeps getting worse, updates for that route will not be accepted for a delayed period.
- Asynchronous updates: These offer another safety mechanism that prevents the routers from flooding the entire routing information at the same time. As mentioned, OSPF does this every 30 minutes. The asynchronous updates mechanism generates a small delay for every device so they do not flood the information exactly at the same time. This improves bandwidth utilization and processing capabilities.
- Route poisoning: This prevents routers from sending packets through a route that has become invalid. Distance vector routing protocols use this to indicate that a route is no longer reachable. This is accomplished by setting the route metric to a maximum value.
- Split horizon: Split horizon prevents updates from being sent out of the same interface they came from because routers in that area should already know about that specific update.
- Poison reverse: This is an exception to the split horizon rule for the poisoned routes.
Route Summarization and Filtering
Route summarization results in routing designs that are more scalable, regardless of the routing protocol used (e.g., RIPv2, EIGRP, or OSPF), as it places network addresses into usable blocks, which can be used for multiple purposes; for example:
- NAT blocks
- Blocks used in redistribution
- Blocks for management VLANs
- Blocks for content services
Route summarization can be used in medium-sized to large networks for faster convergence and to better support sensitive traffic and services, such as VoIP and storage. Convergence time is measured based on the time the SPF recalculations take place in OSPF or the diffusing algorithm runs in EIGRP. An example of route summarization is aggregating a number of Access Layer addresses (172.30.16.0/24 through 172.30.23.0/24) into a single prefix (172.30.16.0/21).
A special form of route summarization can be implemented in the form of default routing. Every modern network usually uses some type of default routing. A best practice is to dynamically advertise the default route 0.0.0.0/0 in an organization from the edge routers, as they connect to the ISPs, as opposed to performing a static route configuration on every router in the organization. This way, all of the external traffic can be routed to the ISP.
When configuring a static default route on every router in the organization to the ISP router, the next hop is the ISP-connected router instead of the directly connected peer router. This could be a problem as it can cause black holes in the network if the path to the ISP router is not available. In addition, this creates a great deal of configuration overhead, as every router must be reconfigured as the exit point changes or another ISP connection is added for redundancy or high availability. Since this implies using manual configuration, this process will involve much more overhead.
A more efficient scenario would be to configure a static route on the organization’s edge devices, and then redistribute that route into the dynamic routing protocol. The egress traffic will leverage whatever metric the routing protocol uses and will find the best path to the ISP.
With any interior routing protocol (except for EIGRP), the “default-information originate” command can be used to generate a default route. However, with EIGRP, the “ip default-network <prefix>” command must be used to configure the last-resort gateway or the default route. This network must be in the route, either as a static route or as an IGRP route, before the EIGRP router will announce the network as a candidate default route to other EIGRP routers.
With a site-to-site VPN connection, it might be a good idea to advertise the corporate summary route or a default route to the company’s headquarters. For example, if the goal is to advertise the 10.0.0.0/8 route to remote sites using Easy VPN Server and Easy VPN Remote, Reverse Route Injection (RRI) can be used to make that possible.
Default Routes and OSPF Stub Areas
OSPF can define different types of stub areas. This method allows for automatic route filtering between areas on the Area Border Routers (ABRs). OSPF supports the following area types:
- Normal area
- Stub area
- Totally stubby area
- Not so stubby area (NSSA)
- Totally not so stubby area (totally NSSA)
Whatever information is filtered or suppressed will be replaced by a default route (0.0.0.0/0). OSPF filters routes between areas only on ABRs; it does not filter prefixes within a single area (intra-area).
Figure 5 – Default Route in a Hub-and-Spoke Scenario
In Figure 5 above, R1 is the hub (headquarters) in the hub-and-spoke topology and the default route to R1 is advertised to the spokes (branches). The branches are defined as stub areas and they cover different networks: 192.168.2.0/24, 192.168.3.0/24, and 192.168.4.0/24. When the spoke routers (R2, R3, or R4) need to communicate with another spoke router, they send traffic to the hub because of the default route and the default route forwards it to the specific spoke. This way, spokes do not have knowledge of the entire network topology and they learn to send all external traffic to the hub router. Something similar can be achieved with EIGRP by originating the default route to a remote location and filtering other prefixes to the stub routers.
Route filtering allows the control of network traffic flow and it prevents unwanted transit traffic, especially in situations that feature redundancy or multiple paths. Route filtering protects against erroneous routing updates and there are several techniques that can be used in this regard. For example, if OSPF Core Layer connectivity is lost, traffic should not be rerouted through a remote site.
OSPF inter-area transit traffic is achieved only by transiting Area 0 or by creating a virtual link as a temporary workaround for possible design issues that prevent having a continuous backbone area. With EIGRP, stub routers can be configured or routes other than the default route can be filtered. With BGP, route filtering can be used to stop a router from becoming a transit between two ISPs to prevent a large amount of traffic from going through the network.
“Defensive filtering,” in which route filtering protects against illegal or unwanted routing traffic, can also be implemented. It is very common for organizations to have extranets, partner networks, or connections to other business or strategic partners. Defensive filtering offers protection in situations where unauthorized routing information is received from an external partner network (e.g., the network is advertising back to the campus prefix).
Without defensive route filtering, erroneous partner advertisements can cause many problems. For example, a strategic partner might have a static route to the Microsoft SharePoint server farm because they are using those services on port 80. If these routes start leaking into the EIGRP or OSPF routing process, then part of the original network might think the SharePoint server farm has actually been moved to an area behind the partner router. Defensive filtering will help prevent this type of scenario, as it prevents leakage and network disruption and enhances security. Defensive filtering is also known as route hiding or route starvation and it can be accomplished using a variety of techniques, for example, with route filters and prefix-lists.
Route redistribution is a very effective route manipulation and management tool, and some of the most important reasons for redistributing routes include the following:
- It is an excellent way to control, manipulate, and manage the routing updates.
- It is an essential mechanism when deploying two or more routing protocols.
- It is a beneficial tool after a merger/acquisition has been achieved.
Route redistribution should be carefully implemented because it can cause suboptimal routing and create black holes in the network. Cisco recommends having distinct regions of routing protocols and to carefully redistribute routing information, as opposed to following an ad-hoc approach to implementing routing protocols.
In addition, if there is more than one link between two network regions using different routing protocols (e.g., EIGRP and OSPF), mutual redistribution might be a consideration, with the redistribution of OSPF into EIGRP and EIGRP into OSPF. When implementing mutual redistribution, it is important to prevent the re-advertisement of information back into the routing area from which it originally came.
Figure 6 – EIGRP to/from OSPF Route Redistribution
Analyzing Figure 6 above, filters are used to prevent the OSPF information that was redistributed into EIGRP information from being re-advertised back into the OSPF part of the organization. This is often referred to as “manual split horizon.” If filtering is not used and there is an outage, routing loops or a strange convergence behavior can appear and this leads to instability in the network design. Both OSPF and EIGRP support route tagging, which facilitates this process. Route maps can be used to add numeric tag-specific prefixes. The tag information is passed along in routing updates and other routers can filter routes that match or do not match specific tags. This can be accomplished using route maps in distribution lists.
Note: The tag values of 110 and 90 used in Figure 5.6 above reflect the ADs of OSPF and EIGRP. While this is not mandatory, it is a recommended best practice when carrying out complex redistribution because this technique helps to easily identify the original protocol that generated each route.
Routing Protocol Migration
Some situations call for migrating between routing protocols, for example, where one company is purchased by a larger company that has a security policy that prevents the use of any proprietary protocols anywhere in the organization. If the purchased company previously used EIGRP, it would have to migrate quickly to OSPF to adhere to the new organization’s policy. There are two ways to migrate between routing protocols:
- Using AD: This involves turning on the new protocol (OSPF in the example above) and then making certain that it has a higher AD than the existing EIGRP routing protocol. This procedure enables OSPF and allows adjacency and the routing databases to be referred to, but it will not actually rely on the OSPF routing protocol for routing decisions. When OSPF is fully deployed, the AD can be changed for one of the two protocols so that OSPF will not have the lower AD.
- Performing redistribution by moving the boundary routers in small steps: With migration by redistribution, in each step of the process a different part of the network will be converted from one routing protocol to another (EIGRP to OSPF in the example above).
To migrate between routing protocols in a large enterprise organization, the first approach (changing the AD) is often the best option. To achieve full connectivity using the second option (migration by redistribution), the boundary routers between the two parts of the networks will have to be bidirectionally redistributed between the two routing protocols. Then, filtering can be implemented using the tagging procedure mentioned previously. After this process, the boundary routers will “move” as more of the organization is migrated to the new routing protocol.
EIGRP is a unique protocol because it uses a hybrid approach, combining distance vector and link-state characteristics. Combining these features makes EIGRP very robust and allows for fast convergence, even in large topologies. The first thing a network designer should consider is that EIGRP is a Cisco proprietary protocol, so it can be used only in environments that contain Cisco devices. Like RIPv2, EIGRP is a classless protocol and it allows for VLSM. Another similarity between the two protocols is their automatic summarization behavior, but this can be disabled just as easily.
The algorithm that EIGRP uses is called the Diffusing Update Algorithm (DUAL). DUAL is the engine that makes EIGRP such a powerful protocol. DUAL operates based on a topology table that contains all of the possible prefixes and information about how to reach those prefixes. The topology table is used to identify a best prefix, called the successor, and puts this route into the routing table. After determining the best route in the topology table, EIGRP identifies second-best routes called feasible successors. Feasible successors are not installed in the routing table until the best route is lost. At that moment, the next best successor in the topology table is installed in the routing table almost immediately because there is no need for other computations. This is the reason EIGRP provides such fast convergence times.
EIGRP is the only IGRP that can perform unequal cost load balancing across different paths. This is accomplished using the “variance” command, which defines a tolerance multiplier that can be applied to the best metric and that will result in the maximum allowed metric.
Figure 7 – EIGRP Unequal Cost Load Balancing
Figure 7 above is an example in which there are two routes with a cumulative metric of 100 to a destination and a route with a cumulative metric of 200 to the same destination. By default, EIGRP performs only equal cost load balancing, so it will send traffic across only the first two links, which have the best metric of 100. If traffic was sent over a third link, the variance should be set to 2, meaning the maximum allowed metric is two times the lowest metric, equaling 200. Traffic will be sent proportionally to the metric, meaning for each packet sent over the third link, two packets are sent over the first two links because their metric is better.
EIGRP creates neighbor relationships with adjacent routes and exchanges information with them using Reliable Transport Protocol (RTP). This protocol ensures that neighbors can exchange information in a reliable manner.
Note: Do not confuse the EIGRP-specific RTP (Reliable Transport Protocol) with the Real-time Transport Protocol used in VoIP environments.
By default, EIGRP calculates route metrics based on bandwidth and delay but it can use other parameters in the calculation, including load and reliability. Enabling the metric calculation based on load and reliability is not recommended by Cisco because the network might become unstable.
EIGRP offers more flexibility than OSPF, which is more rigid and is much more governed by operational and technical considerations. A small- to medium-sized business with an arbitrary network architecture can use EIGRP without many problems because the network does not have to be restructured until scaling up to a larger topology. However, if the topology reaches the point where there are hundreds of routers, then EIGRP might become instable and present long convergence times.
When scaling EIGRP, the structured IP hierarchy should include good route summarization. The most important issue with EIGRP as it relates to stability and convergence is trying to lower the propagation of EIGRP queries, especially when trying to find a feasible successor. One of the key aspects of a scalable EIGRP design (especially in large deployments) is to ensure that there are feasible successors. This can be achieved through an efficient equal cost routing design. In addition, summarization points and filtered routes can also limit EIGRP query propagation and lower the convergence times.
Adjusting the delay timers and tuning using variance, unlike one might think, are suboptimal solutions when trying to achieve low convergence times because this will become almost impossible to perform as the network scales to hundreds of routers. Another suboptimal way many organizations have tried to achieve low convergence times is implementing multiple EIGRP ASs or process numbers. Scaling two or three EIGRP ASs to limit EIGRP queries has proven to be an inefficient solution.
Having multiple EIGRP systems would be justified in a limited number of scenarios, the most common of which are as follows:
- After a merger/acquisition, as a migration strategy.
- Having different groups administering different EIGRP ASs, which is a suboptimal option because this will induce a larger degree of complexity in the network infrastructure; however, it might be necessary to have different trust domains or administrative control boundaries.
- Having an organization with an extremely large network that uses multiple EIGRP ASs to divide the network. This will involve using summary routes at the AS boundaries to advertise blocks of prefixes in the large network.
The most efficient methods for limiting EIGRP queries and achieving a scalable EIGRP design are as follows:
- Using a solid summarization design
- Using distribution lists
- Using stubs
- Ensuring there are feasible successors
- Implementing equal cost routing
- Avoiding having many EIGRP routers
- Avoiding scaling by multiple EIGRP ASs, if possible
The OSPF protocol is one of the most complex routing protocols that can be deployed in modern networks. OSPF is an open-standard protocol, whereas EIGRP is not. OSPF is a classless routing protocol and this allows it to support VLSM. OSPF uses the Dijkstra SPF algorithm to select loop-free paths throughout the topology, while EIGRP uses DUAL. OSPF is designed to be very scalable because it is a hierarchical routing protocol, using the concept of “areas” to split the topology into smaller sections.
OSPF usually does not converge as fast as EIGRP but it does offer efficient updating and convergence, as it takes bandwidth into consideration when calculating route metrics (or costs). A higher bandwidth generates a lower cost and lower costs are preferred in OSPF. OSPF supports authentication, as does EIGRP and RIPv2, and it is very extensible, as are BGP and IS-IS, meaning the protocol can be modified in the future to handle other forms of traffic.
OSPF discovers neighbors and exchanges topology information with them, acting much like EIGRP. Based on the information collected and the link costs, OSPF calculates the shortest paths to each destination using the SPF algorithm. The formula for calculating the interface cost is reference bandwidth/link bandwidth. The default reference bandwidth is 100 Mbps but this can be modified, as can the link bandwidth using the “bandwidth” command.
Note: The reference bandwidth should be modified in networks that contain a combination of 100 Mbps and 1 Gbps links because, by default, all of these interfaces will be assigned the same OSPF cost.
Another aspect that adds to the design complexity of OSPF is that it can be configured to behave differently depending on the topology in which it is implemented. OSPF recognizes different network types and this will control issues such as:
- How updates are sent
- How many adjacencies are made between the OSPF speakers
- How the next hop is calculated
OSPF supports six network types:
- Point-to-multipoint non-broadcast
OSPF does a good job of automatically selecting the network type that is most appropriate for a given technology. For example, configuring OSPF in a broadcast-based Ethernet environment will default to the broadcast type; configuring OSPF on a Frame Relay physical interface will default to the non-broadcast type; and configuring OSPF on a point-to-point serial link will default to the point-to-point network type.
Two network types that are never automatically assigned are point-to-multipoint and point-to-multipoint non-broadcast. These are most appropriate for partial mesh (hub-and-spoke) environments and must be manually configured.
The network types can influence the underlying OSPF protocol in many ways. The broadcast type will be the default on broadcast media, and once OSPF is configured on a broadcast environment, the systems will elect a Designated Router (DR) and, optionally, a Backup Designated Router (BDR) on each segment. To communicate with the DRs, OSPF will multicast updates to 18.104.22.168, and to communicate to every OSPF router, packets are multicasted to 22.214.171.124.
In a broadcast network, the DR is the device that all of the other routers will form their adjacency with and this is a protection mechanism to prevent the network from being overwhelmed with a full mesh of adjacencies. In addition to minimizing adjacencies, the DR also helps minimize the amount of OSPF traffic between OSPF nodes because it establishes a full OSPF adjacency only with the DR. The BDR is a node that will take the place of a DR if it fails.
On a broadcast OSPF segment, if every node had to form adjacencies for the information exchange with all of its neighbors, the number of total neighbor relationships would be n*(n-1)/2, where “n” is the number of routers. Using a DR helps reduce the total number of adjacencies and makes the process more efficient because nodes do not need a full mesh of relationships.
OSPF Router Types
The OSPF hierarchy uses the concept of areas to improve the scalability of the protocol. Link-state protocols operate by flooding information about the status of their links, but when the network is divided into areas, only the routers in a specific area have to agree on the topology map. Setting up areas reduces the convergence domain size because this can hide topology details between areas. This leads to the protocol becoming much more efficient.
Area 0 (backbone) is the critical area in an OSPF environment, and every OSPF design must start from this area. It is also called the transit area because all areas must connect to it and traffic between areas must go through Area 0. Another feature of the backbone area is that it must be contiguous, meaning it cannot be broken into multiple parts. Once the backbone area is designed, other areas, called non-transit areas, can be included and they can be assigned any number. This is illustrated in Figure 8 below:
Figure 8 – OSPF Area Types and Router Roles
Network designers should also understand the different router roles that exist within OSPF:
- Backbone router: This is the terminology given to a router that has at least one link in Area 0.
- Internal router: This router has all links participating in one non-transit area.
- Area Border Router (ABR): The ABR is a router that is positioned between multiple areas. This means the router has at least one link to Area 0 and one link to a non-transit area. ABRs pass information between the backbone area and non-transit areas. They are also used to summarize information between the two areas, thus improving the efficiency and the scalability of the OSPF design.
- Autonomous System Boundary Router (ASBR): An ASBR has at least one link to the OSPF domain and at least one link outside of the OSPF domain touching another routing protocol (EIGRP, IS-IS, or BGP). ASBR is used to redistribute information to and from other routing domains and OSPF.
If the backbone area is split into multiple pieces, virtual links can ensure its continuity. A virtual link is an Area 0 tunnel that connects the dispersed backbone areas. Virtual links are not considered a best design practice but they can be useful in particular situations, like company mergers, as depicted in Figure 9 below:
Figure 9 – OSPF Virtual Link (Example 1)
A virtual link is configured between ABRs as a temporary fix to the problem (split Area 0). The virtual link tunnels the backbone area between the devices so the topology is repaired until a network redesign is implemented.
Another classic case in which virtual links might be used is the situation in which there is an OSPF area not connected to the backbone. Looking at Figure 10 below, Area 100 is connected to Area 0 but Area 200 is connected only to Area 100. This poses a design problem because it goes against the principle stating that every area must be connected to Area 0. The solution in this case would be to configure a virtual link between Area 0 and Area 200 so the backbone is extended to reach Area 200.
Figure 10 – OSPF Virtual Link (Example 2)
Note: In the scenario depicted in Figure 10, the virtual link is often considered an extension of the non-transit area (Area 200 in this case) to reach Area 0. This is not true because the virtual link is part of Area 0, so in fact Area 0 is extended to reach the non-transit area (Area 200 in this case).
Another important OSPF aspect is represented by the different Link-State Advertisement (LSA) types. Each LSA type has a unique format that is defined by the type of information it contains (either internal or external prefixes). The LSA types are as follows:
- Type 1 – Router LSA: Used by routers in an area to advertise a link to another router in the same area.
- Type 2 – Network LSA: Generated by the DR to send updates about the attached routers.
- Type 3 – Network Summary LSA: Generated by the ABR to advertise information from one area to another.
- Type 4 – ASBR Summary LSA: Generated by the ABR to send information about the location of the ASBR.
- Type 5 – External LSA: Used by the ASBR to advertise external prefixes to the OSPF domain.
- Type 6 – Multicast LSA: Not implemented by Cisco.
- Type 7 – NSSA External LSA: Used in not so stubby areas to advertise external prefixes.
- Types 8, 9, and 10 – Opaque LSA: Used for extensibility.
The LSA types allow for a hierarchical structure:
- LSAs that only flow within an area (intra-area routes): Types 1 and 2 (O)
- LSAs that flow between areas (inter-area routes): Types 3 and 4 (O, IA)
- External routes: Type 5 (E1/E2) or Type 7 (N1/N2)
OSPF Area Types
OSPF offers the capability to create different area types that relate to the various LSA types presented above and the way they flow inside a specific area. The different area types are as follows:
- Regular area: This is the normal OSPF area, with no restrictions in the LSA flow.
- Stub area: This area prevents the external Type 5 LSAs from entering the area. It also stops Type 4 LSAs, as they are used only in conjunction with Type 5 LSAs.
- Totally stubby area: This area prevents Type 5, Type 4, and Type 3 LSAs from entering the area. A default route is automatically injected to reach the internal destinations.
- Not so stubby area (NSSA): The NSSA blocks Type 4 and Type 5 LSAs but it can connect to other domains and an ASBR can be in this area. The NSSA does not receive external routes injected in other areas but it can inject external routes into the OSPF domain. The external routes will be injected as Type 7 LSAs. These Type 7 LSAs convert to Type 5 LSAs using the NSSA ABR (the router that connects to the backbone), and they reach other OSPF areas as Type 5 LSAs.
- Totally not so stubby area (totally NSSA): This area has the same characteristics as the NSSA, except that it also blocks Type 3 LSAs from entering the area.
Note: All routers in an OSPF area must agree on the stub flag.
The various areas and LSA types are summarized in Figure 11 below:
Figure 11 – OSPF Areas and LSA Types
All of these areas and LSA types make OSPF a very hierarchical and scalable routing protocol that can be tweaked and tuned for very large environments based on all of these design elements. OSPF allows for summarization, which can be carried out in two locations:
- Between areas (inter-area summarization), using Type 3 LSAs
- At the ASBR, summarizing external prefixes, using Type 5 and Type 7 LSAs
When analyzing scalability on a router, there are three resource areas that should be taken into consideration:
- Interface bandwidth
The routing protocol places demands on the underlying router, and there are four factors that lead to the workload calculations:
- The number of adjacent neighbors the router has (OSPF neighbors in this case). OSPF will flood all of the link-state modifications to all of the routers in an area. Typically, one router should have no more than 60 neighbors.
- The number of adjacent routers in an area. Typically, there should be no more than 50 routers in an OSPF area. In situations where a larger number of areas might be needed, the topology can be split into multiple areas.
- The number of areas supported by each router. Since every ABR is in at least two areas (the backbone and one adjacent area), for maximum stability, one router should not be in more than three areas. Following this guideline, an ABR should touch the backbone and a maximum of two other areas. This design recommendation depends on the total number of routers and on the number of routers in one area.
- Choosing the designated router. DRs and BDRs are the “busiest” routers in an OSPF topology because they establish full OSPF adjacencies with all other OSPF routers. Proper routers should be chosen to carry out these tasks, for example, routers that can manage high CPU and memory loads. Avoid choosing the same router to be the DR in multiple LANs at the same time.
In situations where there are many branches or remote routers, the workload should be split across several peers. For example, IPsec VPN peers running OSPF over GRE tunnels form a less stable environment than a non-VPN peer environment. Proper lab testing should be done before implementing the production network.
EIGRP is more flexible and tolerant to an ad-hoc network topology, but OSPF needs a well-defined hierarchy with a clear backbone and area topology. Routing information can be reduced by having a good area design.
OSPF designers should use techniques to minimize the number of advertisements going into and out of an area. Anything in the LSA database must be sent to all of the routers in an area, so anytime a modification needs to be propagated, the CPU, memory, and bandwidth parameters will be affected. Network designers should be conservative in adding routers to Area 0. If possible, this area should contain only the necessary backbone routers and the ABRs to connect other OSPF areas.
If the OSPF design cannot be simplified, every non-backbone area should be configured to be some type of stub area or totally stubby area. Solid summarization techniques should also be used to build a scalable OSPF design.
An important issue network designers often face is deciding whether ABRs should be Core Layer or Distribution Layer routers. This depends on the network topology in the organization. The general guidelines recommend placing different functional network areas into different OSPF areas.
Figure 12 – OSPF Network Design
Analyzing Figure 12 above, different logical areas are separated into dedicated OSPF areas. An OSPF area exists for the following:
- The data center or server arm
- The Enterprise Campus area
- The hub-and-spoke topology to the regional offices
OSPF ABRs provide the ability to support route summarization or to create stubby or totally stubby areas whenever possible. The effectiveness of route summarization will depend entirely on how good the addressing scheme and hierarchy is. Some guidelines regarding summarization in and out of areas include the following:
- Configure the addressing scheme so the range of subnets assigned within an area is contiguous.
- Develop an address space scheme that will be easy to partition as the network grows.
- Assign subnets according to simple octet boundaries, where possible.
- Always plan ahead for new routers and new areas.
- Ensure that new routers are placed properly as ABRs, backbone routers, or other types of routers.
Routes can be summarized and the LSA database size and flooding can be reduced in OSPF by using the “area range” command (internal summarization) and the “summary-address” command (external summarization), by implementing filtering, or by originating default routes into certain areas. Different type of routes can also be filtered in stub and totally stubby areas.
OSPF Hub-and-Spoke Design Considerations
The hub-and-spoke topology in Figure 13 below should be carefully designed, as specific considerations relate to this type of topology. Network designers should take into consideration the fact that any change performed on any of the spokes will be propagated to the hub and then replicated to all of the other spokes. This behavior can put a great deal of overhead on the hub router and this is called “change flooding.” To prevent this issue, use stub areas, totally stubby areas, or totally NSSAs.
Figure 13 – OSPF Hub-and-Spoke Router
In hub-and-spoke scenarios, the number of spokes and the area selection criteria should be carefully controlled. If there are a few remote sites (spokes), the hub and the spokes can be placed within the same area. However, if there are many remote sites, the spokes might need to be split into more areas, which would result in implementing a multi-area design. To summarize in and out of the remote areas, the hub must be an ABR. Another good practice is to design the OSPF network so that it has a small and very stable Area 0 because the backbone area is critical in an OSPF topology.
Note: The most simplified backbone area design involves grouping the ABRs only in Area 0.
If the spokes have low-speed links, the link speeds should be increased to improve the design. Not having enough bandwidth to flood LSAs when there are topology changes is a major issue.
OSPF has several choices for the type of networks to use. Cisco recommends avoiding the use of broadcast or Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) network types and instead using one of the following types:
- A single interface on the hub treated as a point-to-multipoint network
- Individual point-to-point interfaces on the hub for each spoke and a point-to-point designation
OSPF Full-Mesh Design Considerations
Some organizations need to deploy their OSPF speaker or their peer into a full-mesh topology, like in Figure 5.14 below. The problem with flooding in an OSPF full-mesh topology is that it is extremely difficult and it is not scalable. A full-mesh topology implies a number of total connections equal to n*(n-1)/2, where “n” equals the number of nodes. If there are eight OSPF neighbors, then 28 links between all the nodes will be needed. Adding one more router to the OSPF full-mesh topology would increase the amount of links, from 28 to 36, which is not scalable. To deploy this implementation, an OSPF “mesh group” can be used. This is a manual method to reduce flooding and it works by selecting two routers (DRs) to handle the flooding process and filter out all of the other routers.
Figure 14 – OSPF Full-Mesh Topology
On broadcast, non-broadcast, and point-to-point networks, the “ip ospf database-filter all out” command in interface configuration mode can be issued on all of the routers that are not selected as DRs to manually prevent the flooding of OSPF LSAs. When using point-to-multipoint networks, the “neighbor <ip_address> database-filter all out” command in routing configuration mode can be used.
An additional feature called OSPF Flood Reduction can also be implemented if LSA flooding is creating too much overhead on the CPU or on bandwidth. This feature can be configured using the “ip ospf flood-reduction” command at the interface level. This feature eliminates the periodic refreshing of unmodified LSAs, which reduces the impact on router resources. An important thing to keep in mind is that OSPF flood reduction eliminates only the effect; it does not deal with the underlying issue of the unoptimized OSPF design. This command should be used in conjunction with some of the guidelines mentioned previously to fix the real OSPF issues that follow:
- Too many routers in an area or too many adjacencies
- An unstable OSPF design
- A heavy adjacency workload
- A large full-mesh topology that uses mesh groups, which does not always offer optimal results
OSPF Fast Convergence
One of the things that can be done to obtain fast convergence in OSPF includes using subsecond OSPF timers. This is implemented by setting the dead interval to one second and using a hello multiplier to designate how many hello packets will be sent in a one-second interval. Using fast hellos is recommended in small- to medium-sized networks but they should not be used in large networks. This can offer fast convergence but it is not a scalable solution.
Network designers should understand the SPF algorithm behavior in the OSPF environment to obtain fast convergence. This behavior depends on the number of nodes, links, and LSAs in the area. iSPF (Incremental SPF) can also be used, which uses a modified Dijkstra algorithm to compute the portion of the path tree that has been changed. Doing this instead of computing the entire tree will offer faster OSPF convergence and will reduce CPU overhead. iSPF has been available since IOS 12.3(2)T, and lab testing has shown that iSPF used on 10,000 nodes offered a 50 ms convergence time. iSPF is implemented using the “ispf” command under the OSPF process.
Another issue related to router convergence is how to detect a link failure. This is usually achieved using some type of keepalive mechanism or electrical signal that helps in detecting the loss of the link. A special technology used for this purpose is Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD). BFD is a routing protocol technology that uses fast Layer 2 link hellos to notify an engineer of any failed links or one-way links. BFD is supported on multiple Cisco platforms, including 6500, 7600, 12000, and CRS routers. This is one method for configuring subsecond Layer 2 failure detection between adjacent network nodes. Routing protocols can also be configured to respond to BFD notifications and immediately begin the Layer 3 route convergence process.
Border Gateway Protocol is the only exterior gateway protocol in use today and its role is primarily to exchange routing information between organizations. BGP is a standard-based protocol defined in RFC 4271 and is the successor of EGP (Exterior Gateway Protocol).
Necessity of BGP
BGP is used to route between ASs and is considered to be a path vector routing protocol. Routing decisions are based on multiple attributes that can be tuned and controlled, resulting in the particular path the AS’s data will take (i.e., this is the routing decision). This is more of a policy based routing approach and policy routing is very important for ISPs routing traffic between each other for different ASs.
BGP is a classless routing protocol and it supports VLSM and summarization (route aggregation). While IGRPs can scale to thousands of routes, BGP can scale to hundreds of thousands of routes, making it the most scalable routing protocol ever developed. Currently, the global BGP routing table has over 300,000 routes.
Another characteristic of BGP is its high rate of stability, as there is never a solid convergence of the Internet routing table (i.e., something is always changing in such a large routing table). In addition, it is stable enough to handle routing and decision making at the same time. Because BGP focuses on the enforcement of policies, it does not use a simple metric value that might be tied to a single parameter (like bandwidth). Instead, BGP has a group of attributes that can be manipulated to dictate a particular routing policy.
When used to exchange routing information between organizations, BGP can be configured in two particular scenarios (see Figure 15 below):
- Transit networks: ISPs that want to provide transit to other destinations on the public Internet.
- Multi-homed networks: Big Enterprise Networks that rely heavily on Internet traffic and have sophisticated connectivity requirements to two or more ISPs. BGP allows them to control inbound and outbound routing policies.
Figure 15 – BGP Deployment Scenarios
Most of the Enterprise Networks do not need BGP and this is for various reasons:
- The network requires single ISP connectivity and default routing configuration is sufficient. A default route will point to the ISP so all Internet traffic is routed to that single ISP.
- Memory and CPU resources are limited and do not support a BGP implementation. The global routing table needs more than 1 GB of memory just for storage.
- Not owning the IPv4 address space in use. This happens in situations where the organization’s addresses are owned by the ISP, which is a frequent occurrence for small- and medium-sized organizations.
Similar to OSPF, IS-IS, and EIGRP, BGP uses a three-table data structure:
- Neighbor table: Contains information about adjacency with peers.
- BGP table (topology table): Contains all of the prefixes learned from peers.
- IP routing table: Contains the best routes from the BGP tables.
The devices running BGP will establish adjacencies to build the neighbor table and will then exchange updates to build the BGP table. After the BGP table is built, the best paths for routing information are chosen and are used to build the IP routing table. BGP allows for different peering types to be created:
- External BGP (eBGP) peering: BGP peering with a neighbor that is outside of the AS.
- Internal BGP (iBGP) peering: BGP peering with devices inside the AS.
Figure 16 – BGP Peering Types
Figure 16 above shows an example of BGP peering types. The BGP peering types a route is being sent to and received from will influence the update and path selection rules. An example of this is that eBGP peers are assumed to be directly connected. If they are not, a special command called “ebgp multihop” must be entered to let the devices know they are not directly connected and to establish the BGP peering. This assumption has no equivalent when considering iBGP peering, where there is no requirement for direct connectivity.
Another example regarding the iBGP versus eBGP behavior is that an eBGP-learned route will not be advertised between iBGP peers because of a special loop prevention mechanism that prevents an update learned via iBGP to be sent to other iBGP peers. This happens because BGP assumes that all routers within an AS have complete information about each other. Multiple solutions exist to solve this issue, including the following:
- Configure a full mesh of iBGP peers
- Use BGP Route Reflectors
- Organize the AS into BGP Confederations
The solution that involves a full mesh of iBGP peers is the least preferred because of the increased number of connections. The total number of connections is n*(n-1)/2, where “n” equals the number of BGP routers, so for 1,000 routers there would be 499,500 peers. This is very hard to implement and maintain, so the Route Reflector and Confederations solutions are recommended instead. Details about BGP Route Reflectors and BGP Confederations will be covered later in this chapter.
BGP Path Vector Attributes
BGP can use multiple attributes to define a routing policy and the most important are as follows:
- Next hop: This attribute must be present in each BGP update; it indicates where the traffic should be sent to reach a particular destination.
- AS-path: This attribute lists all of the Autonomous Systems through which the prefix has passed. AS-path is similar to a hop count, except it uses AS numbers and provides more details about the path.
- Origin: This attribute provides information about how the prefix entered the BGP system, either directly advertised into BGP with the “network” command or redistributed from other routing protocols.
- Local preference: This attribute influences the way traffic enters the AS and the path that it takes; it can also influence the way packets exit the AS and the path that they take.
- Community: This attribute groups destinations in a certain community and applies routing decisions according to those communities.
- Multi-Exist Discriminator (MED): This attribute influences the way traffic enters the AS and the path that it takes.
- Atomic aggregate: This attribute is used when performing BGP summarization.
- Aggregator: This attribute is used when performing BGP summarization.
BGP attributes can be grouped into several categories, such as well-known and optional. The well-known attributes are supported by all BGP vendors and the optional attributes are supported only by certain BGP vendors. BGP attributes can also be mandatory and discretionary. The mandatory attributes are sent in every routing update, while the discretionary attributes may or may not be present in routing updates. Another category relies on the path attribute’s transitivity, which can be either transitive (they pass between eBGP and iBGP neighbors) or non-transitive (they pass between iBGP neighbors only). Valid combinations of BGP attributes include the following:
- Well-known mandatory (next-hop, AS-path, origin)
- Well-known discretionary (local preference, atomic aggregate)
- Optional transitive (aggregator, community)
- Optional non-transitive (MED)
BGP systems will analyze all of these attributes and will determine the best path to get to a destination based on this very complex decision process. Only the best route is sent to the routing table and to the peers. Finding out whether the next hop is reachable must be determined first. If it is not, the prefixes will not have a best path available, but if it is, the decision process will analyze the following aspects:
- Weight (Cisco-specific attribute) – the highest weight is preferred.
- Local preference – the highest local preference is preferred.
- Locally originated routes – these are preferred.
- AS-path – the shortest AS-path is preferred.
- Origin – routes with the lowest origin type are preferred.
- MED – the lowest MED is preferred.
- Neighbor type – routes that came via eBGP over those that were learned via iBGP are preferred.
- IGP metric – if there is still a tie, the lowest IGP metric wins.
- If multiple paths exist in the routing table, the path that was received first is preferred.
- The route that comes from the BGP router with the lowest router ID is preferred.
- The path with the minimum cluster list length is preferred.
- The path that comes from the lowest neighbor address is preferred.
BGP typically has multi-homed links to ISPs and is found in MPLS VPN scenarios. When using BGP as an interior routing protocol, a full mesh of iBGP routers is necessary because they do not re-advertise routes that were learned from other iBGP peers, according to BGP behavior. Two methods for scaling iBGP and avoiding the need for a full-mesh topology are using Route Reflectors and Confederations.
BGP Route Reflectors
Route Reflectors (RRs) are nodes that reflect the iBGP updates to devices that are configured as RR clients. This solution is easy to design and implement and solves the iBGP split horizon rule. A full-mesh connection between RR nodes and normal nodes (non-RR clients) must be configured, but a full-mesh connection between the RR and its clients is not required. This concept is illustrated in Figure 17 below:
Figure 17 – BGP Route Reflectors
BGP RRs, defined in RF 2796, are iBGP speakers that reflect routes that were learned from iBGP peers to RR clients. They also reflect routes received from RR clients to other iBGP peers (non-RR clients). Route reflector client configuration is carried out only on the RR device, using the “neighbor <ip_address> route-reflector-client” command. This configuration process can be performed incrementally as more RRs or RR clients are added. The RR client will often establish peer sessions only with RR devices.
Figure 18 – BGP Route Reflector Redundancy
Often, redundant RRs are needed to avoid a single point of failure. An RR and its associated clients form an RR cluster, as depicted in Figure 18 above. In some situations there can be overlap in the RR clusters but this adds to the complexity of the design. RR functionality respects the following rules when propagating updates:
- When an RR receives a route from an eBGP peer, it sends the route to all clients and non-clients.
- When an RR receives a route from an RR client, it reflects the route to all RR clients and non-clients, as well as to all eBGP peers.
- When an RR receives a route from a non-client, it reflects the route to all RR clients and sends the route to all eBGP peers.
The second BGP scalability method is using BGP Confederations, as defined in RFC 3065. This implies injecting information into BGP routes using the AS-path attribute to prevent loops in the AS. This technique works by dividing a normal BGP AS into multiple sub-ASs. The only AS visible to the outside world is the outer AS (the Confederation AS). The BGP Confederation design is equivalent to having a VLAN and dividing it into private VLANs.
BGP Confederations are more complex than Route Reflectors and they function by creating sub-ASs within the main AS. The connections between sub-ASs behave like eBGP peer sessions and the connections inside sub-ASs are pure iBGP peer sessions. This means that only full-mesh configuration is needed inside the sub-ASs, where RRs can also be configured, so a combination of BGP design technologies is available.
Figure 19 – BGP Confederations
Analyzing Figure 19 above, the Confederation AS 100 has been configured, and within this confederation AS, three sub-ASs (Confederation internal peers) have been configured: 65001, 65002, and 65003. The connections between the devices in the same sub-AS are BGP Confederation internal peers and the connections between the devices in different sub-AS areas are BGP Confederation external peers, and they have many similarities to eBGP connections.
As iBGP information is exchanged within a Confederation AS, the sub-AS numbers are put into the Confederation sequence, which functions similar to the AS-path attribute as a loop prevention mechanism. The route advertisement rules are similar to the RR distribution rules:
- A route that is learned from an eBGP peer is advertised to all the Confederation external and internal peers.
- A route that is learned from a Confederation internal peer is advertised to all Confederation external and eBGP peers.
- A route that is learned from a Confederation external peer is advertised to all Confederation internal and eBGP peers.
Private AS numbers are used within a Confederation AS and are then removed from updates sent out of the Confederation. This makes BGP more scalable and allows the number of connections to be reduced.
Note: AS numbers are defined as 16-bit integers, so they range from 0 to 65535. Sub-ASs are usually assigned private AS numbers, ranging from 64512 to 65535. Because of the exhaustion of public AS numbers, IANA introduced 32-bit AS numbers and began allocating them over the last few years.
Cisco routers do not route IPv6 by default and this capability should be activated with the “ipv6 unicast-routing” command. Cisco routers are dual-stack capable by default, meaning they are capable of running IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously on the same interfaces.
IPv6 allows the use of static routing and it supports specific dynamic routing protocols that are variations of the IPv4 routing protocols modified or redesigned to support IPv6, such as the following:
- RIPng (RIP new generation)
Note: IS-IS and BGP underwent the least amount of modifications to support IPv6 because they were built with extensibility in mind.
RIPng, OSPFv3, and EIGRPv6 are new routing protocols that work independently of the IPv4 versions and they run in a completely separate process on the device. BGP and IS-IS are exceptions to this rule, as they route IPv6 traffic using the same process used for IPv4 traffic, but they use the concept of address families that hold the entire IPv6 configuration.
Many of the issues with IPv4 (e.g., name resolution and NBMA environments) still exist with IPv6 routing. An important aspect is that IPv6 routing protocols communicate with the remote link-local addresses when establishing their adjacencies and exchanging routing information. In the routing table of an IPv6 router, the next hops are the link-local addresses of the neighbors.
As mentioned, static routing is one of the options that can be used in IPv6 and it has the same implications as in IPv4. The route can point to:
- The next hop (the next hop must be resolved)
- A multipoint interface (the final destination must be resolved)
- A point-to-point interface (no resolution is required)
RIPng, also called RIP for IPv6, was specified in RFC 2080 and is similar in operation to RIPv1 and RIPv2. While RIPv2 uses the multicast address 126.96.36.199 to exchange routing information with its neighbors, RIPng uses the similar FF02::9 address and UDP port 521. Another difference between the two versions is that IPv6 is configured at the interface level while RIPv1 and RIPv2 are configured at the global routing configuration level.
OSPFv3 is defined in RFC 2740 and is similar in operation to OSPFv2 (for IPv4). OSPFv3 even supports the same network types as OSPFv2:
- Point-to-multipoint non-broadcast
EIGRPv6 is similar in operation to EIGRP for IPv4 and uses IP protocol 88 to multicast updates to FF02::A.
Note: An important aspect to consider when implementing EIGRPv6 is that, unlike EIGRP for IPv4, the process is shut down until it is manually enabled by issuing the “no shutdown” command under the routing process.
BGP for IPv6 is configured in the address family configuration mode but it is based on the same configuration principles used by BGP for IPv4:
- An underlying transport IGP is required.
- There is an implicit iBGP loop prevention mechanism that prevents iBGP-learned routes from being advertised to other iBGP neighbors (this can be solved by using Route Reflectors or Confederations).
- There is an implicit eBGP loop prevention mechanism that does not accept routes entering an AS that has the same AS in the path.
- It uses the same best-path selection process.
When designing enterprise routing, network architects should first figure out whether they should use static or dynamic routing. Static routing implies manually defining routes on devices and dynamic routing implies using a dedicated routing protocol that will build the routing table. The dynamic routing protocols most often used in modern networks are EIGRP, OSPF, and BGP.
Large networks, including the Internet, are based on the Autonomous System (AS) concept. An AS defines a group of network devices under a common administration and most often this defines a large organization or an ISP. Routing protocols can be classified based on different criteria. Depending on the zone in which they operate, they can be interior (inter-AS) routing protocols or exterior (intra-AS) routing protocols.
Interior routing protocols can be further classified as distance vector routing protocols or link-state routing protocols, based on their behavior regarding the router update exchange process. Distance vector routing protocols include RIP, IGRP, and RIPng. Link-state routing protocols include OSPF, IS-IS, and OSPFv3.
The main difference between distance vector routing protocols and link-state routing protocols is the way they exchange routing updates. Distance vector routing protocols function using the “routing by rumor” technique, as every router relies on its neighbors to maintain correct routing information. This means the entire routing table is sent periodically to the neighbors.
Link-state routing protocols do not generally “route by rumor” like distance vector routing protocols do. The routing devices exchange information between them about their link-states. Devices build a map of the network independently and loop-free based on the link-state information each router generates and propagates to the other routers.
Link-state routing protocols offer a series of important advantages compared to distance vector routing protocols. The most important advantage relates to the convergence factor. Link-state routing protocols converge must faster because as soon as a network topology changes, only that specific information is sent to the routers in a given area.
Exterior routing protocols run between ASs (inter-AS) and the most common example is BGPv4. The main reason different types of routing protocols are used to carry routes outside of the AS boundaries is the need to exchange a large amount of route entries.
Routers use Administrative Distance (AD) to select the best route when multiple routing protocols advertise the same prefix. The AD value represents how trustworthy a particular routing protocol is.
Route summarization helps make the routing design more scalable, regardless of the routing protocol used (e.g., RIPv2, EIGRP, or OSPF). It also helps place network addresses into usable blocks (listed below), which can be used for multiple purposes:
- NAT blocks
- Blocks used in redistribution
- Blocks for management VLANs
- Blocks for content services
A special form of route summarization can be implemented in the form of default routing. Every modern network usually uses some type of default routing. The best practice is to dynamically advertise the default route 0.0.0.0/0 out of the Enterprise Network to the ISPs, as opposed to performing a static route configuration on every router in the organization.
Route filtering allows the control of network traffic flow and prevents unwanted transit traffic, especially in situations that feature redundancy or multiple paths. Route filtering protects against erroneous routing updates and there are several techniques that can be used in this regard. For example, with OSPF, if Core Layer connectivity is lost, traffic should not be rerouted through a remote site.
There are two ways to migrate between routing protocols:
- Using AD
- Performing redistribution by moving the boundary routers in small steps
Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP) is a unique protocol in that it uses a hybrid approach, combining distance vector and link-state characteristics. Combining these features makes EIGRP very robust and allows for fast convergence, even in large topologies. EIGRP functions by using DUAL and it is the only IGRP that can perform unequal cost load balancing.
When analyzing scalability on a router, there are three resource areas that should be taken into consideration: memory, CPU, and interface bandwidth.
The most efficient methods for limiting EIGRP queries and achieving a scalable EIGRP design are as follows:
- Using a solid summarization design
- Using distribute lists
- Using stub areas
- Ensuring there are feasible successors
- Implementing equal cost routing
- Avoiding scaling by multiple EIGRP ASs, if possible
Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) protocol is one of the most complex routing protocols that can be deployed in modern networks. OSPF is an open-standard protocol, while EIGRP is not. OSPF functions by using the Dijkstra SPF algorithm and by exchanging Link-State Advertisements (LSAs) between neighbors. LSA types are as follows:
- Type 1 – Router LSA
- Type 2 – Network LSA
- Type 3 – Network Summary LSA
- Type 4 – ASBR Summary LSA
- Type 5 – External LSA
- Type 6 – Multicast LSA
- Type 7 – NSSA External LSA
- Types 8, 9, and 10 – Opaque LSA
OSPF offers the capability to create different area types that relate to the various LSA types presented above and the way they flow inside a specific area. The different area types are as follows:
- Regular area
- Stub area
- Totally stubby area
- Not so stubby area (NSSA)
- Totally not so stubby area (totally NSSA)
The major points that should be taken into consideration when designing a scalable OSPF design are:
- The number of adjacent neighbors the router has (OSPF neighbors in this case)
- The number of adjacent routers in an area
- The number of areas supported by each router
- Choosing the designated router
BGP is a highly scalable path vector routing protocol. Its metric is based on multiple attributes that can be tuned and controlled to decide which path the AS’s data will take.
BGP can be used in transit networks (ISPs that want to provide transit to other destinations on the public Internet) or in multi-homed networks (big organizations that connect to multiple ISPs).
When using BGP as an interior routing protocol, a full mesh of iBGP routers is necessary because they do not re-advertise routes that were learned from other iBGP peers, according to BGP protocol behavior.
Two methods for scaling iBGP and avoiding the need for a full-mesh topology are as follows:
- Route Reflectors
IPv6 allows the use of static routing and also supports specific dynamic routing protocols that are variations of the IPv4 routing protocols modified or redesigned to support IPv6:
"Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""Mipango ya Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa Uendeshaji wa IPv4"" ni sehemu ya programu ya CCNP ENARSI." Sura hii ni muhimu kwa ajili ya vyeti CCNP ENARSI na itaanza na mapitio ya baadhi ya dhana ya jumla routing na masuala kuhusu njia muhtasari. Next, itakuwa kuchambua mada nyingine routing, kama vile njia ya kuchuja na usambazaji upya. Mwishowe, itachunguza maelezo na mazoea bora ambayo ni muhimu kwa miundo ya njia inayoweza kupanuliwa wakati wa kutumia EIGRP, OSPF, na BGP. Sisi kufunika routing misingi katika yetu bure Mtandao + kitabu kama unahitaji brush juu. Kabla ya kuchambua maelezo kuhusu kila moja ya itifaki ya routing, baadhi ya habari ya jumla kuhusu IP routing itakuwa iliyotolewa kwanza. Mtengenezaji wa mtandao anapaswa kujua sifa muhimu ambazo itifaki tofauti za njia zina kwa sababu watakuwa katika nafasi ya kupendekeza itifaki maalum za njia kwa miradi tofauti. Kwanza muhimu uamuzi vigezo ni figuring nje kama static au nguvu routing inapaswa kutumika. Static routing ina maana manually kufafanua njia juu ya vifaa na dynamic routing ina maana kutumia kujitolea routing itifaki ambayo kujenga meza routing. Ingawa njia static inaweza kuonekana muhimu katika mitandao ya kisasa, kuna hali ambapo wanaweza kutoa granular udhibiti na uboreshaji wa habari kujifunza na itifaki routing. Njia za static zinaweza kutumika pamoja na itifaki za routing za nguvu kufikia mitandao maalum au kutoa lango la default (kwa mfano, kuonyesha ISP), ambayo ni muhimu katika hali ambapo mtandao wa marudio sio sehemu ya hifadhidata ya itifaki ya routing. Hali nyingine ambayo njia static ni kutumika ni kufuta baadhi ya dynamically kujifunza routing habari. Njia ya static inaweza pia kutumika katika fomu ya njia ya static ya kuelea, kwa mfano, kuweka umbali wa kiutawala (AD) wa njia fulani ya static kwa thamani ya juu (mbaya) kuliko thamani ya AD ya njia hiyo hiyo iliyojifunza kupitia itifaki ya njia kwa sababu za kushindwa. Kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa njia ya njia ya ndani ya mlango (IGRP) au kwa njia ya nje ya mlango (EGRP). Wakati wa kuelekeza kati ya vifaa ndani ya shirika (Autonomous System < AS), kuna IPv4 msingi IGRPs kuchagua kutoka, kama vile zifuatazo: RIPv1 na IGRP ni kuchukuliwa itifaki urithi na baadhi ya vifaa vya mtandao wa kisasa hawana msaada wao. On-Demand Routing (ODR) ni Cisco proprietary itifaki iliyoundwa kwa ajili ya hub-na-spoke topologies. Inatoa kazi ya msingi routing na kazi juu ya Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP). Mipango ya kawaida ya ndani inayotumiwa katika mazingira yasiyo ya hub-na-spoke ni RIPv2, OSPF, IS-IS, na EIGRP. IPv6 hutumia matoleo maalum ya itifaki za routing, kama vile zifuatazo: IPv6 Routing kati ya AS (kutoka mashirika makubwa hadi mtandao, au kati ya ISP) ni kukamilika kwa kutumia itifaki maalum routing aitwaye EGRPs. Mfumo wa EGRP unaotumika zaidi kwa IPv4 na IPv6 ni Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). Kampuni nyingi zina miundombinu ya mtandao ambayo ni ngumu sana na kubwa ambayo inazunguka ulimwengu, kwa hivyo hutumia BGP ndani ya mtandao wao kama IGRP yao. Mitandao mikubwa, ikiwa ni pamoja na Internet, ni msingi juu ya dhana AS. AS ni kundi la vifaa vya mtandao chini ya utawala wa kawaida, na mara nyingi hii hufafanua shirika kubwa au ISP. Routing itifaki inaweza kuwa classified kulingana na vigezo tofauti. Kulingana na eneo ambalo wanafanya kazi, wanaweza kuchukuliwa ndani (inter-AS) routing itifaki au nje (intra-AS) routing itifaki. Protokolli za routing za ndani zinaweza kugawanywa zaidi kama itifaki za routing za vector ya umbali na itifaki za routing za hali ya kiungo, kulingana na tabia yao kuhusu mchakato wa kubadilishana wa sasisho la router. Kila aina ya itifaki ya routing itafunikwa kwa undani katika sehemu zifuatazo, pamoja na kuzingatia muundo wao. Mipango ya Routing ya Ndani (IRP) ni mfumo wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani wa mfumo wa ndani. Picha ya 5.1 - Mipango ya Routing Picha ya 1 hapo juu inaonyesha itifaki tofauti za routing zinazopatikana. Kipengele muhimu ambacho lazima kuzingatiwa wakati wa kuchagua itifaki ya routing ni tofauti kati ya umbali vector na kiungo-hali routing itifaki. Link-hali routing itifaki walikuwa maendeleo baada ya umbali vector routing itifaki na wao ni mengi zaidi ya kisasa. Jamii maalum inahusisha itifaki za njia za mseto ambazo zina sifa bora za teknolojia ya vector ya umbali na hali ya kiungo. tu mseto routing itifaki kutumika katika mitandao ya kisasa ni EIGRP. Vector Routing ni aina ya protocol ya kuunganisha ya ndani ya mfumo wa router na hutengeneza picha ya ndani ya topolojia kwa kubadilishana mara kwa mara meza kamili za routing kati ya vifaa vya jirani. Tofauti kuu kati ya umbali vector routing itifaki na kiungo-hali routing itifaki ni njia ya kubadilishana routing updates. Uwezo wa distance vector routing protocols kutumia "routing kwa uvumi" mbinu, kama kila router hutegemea majirani zake kudumisha sahihi routing habari. Kwa mfano, kama ilivyoelezwa katika Picha ya 2, njia ya njia ya vector ya umbali ni rahisi kutekeleza na kudumisha. Upande wa chini ni wakati wa kukusanyika. Converged mtandao ni mtandao katika ambayo kila router ina mtazamo sawa ya topolojia. Wakati mabadiliko ya topolojia hutokea, routers katika eneo husika kueneza habari mpya kwa mapumziko ya mtandao. Kwa sababu hii ni kufanyika juu ya hop-kwa-hop msingi (yaani, kila router hupita yake kikamilifu updated routing habari kwa kila jirani), mtandao convergence ni hatimaye imara baada ya kiasi kikubwa cha muda kupita. Kwa kuongezea chini ya mwingiliano wa polepole, kwa sababu kubadilishana kamili kwa meza ya njia hutokea kati ya routers, itifaki za njia za umbali wa vektor ni nyingi zaidi ya bandwidth kuliko itifaki za njia za hali ya kiungo. Hii hutokea hasa katika mitandao mikubwa, ambapo meza za routing zinaweza kuwa na ukubwa mkubwa. Kulingana na mambo haya, umbali vector routing itifaki ni ilipendekeza tu katika ndogo Enterprise Network utekelezaji. Mfano wa njia ya njia ya umbali-vector bado kutumika katika mitandao ya kisasa ni RIPv2 (kuelezwa katika RFC 2453). RIPV2 hutumia hesabu ya hop kama kipimo cha uteuzi wa njia, na hesabu ya juu ya hop ya 15. RIPv2 updates ni kutumwa kwa kutumia multicast kwa default, ingawa wanaweza kuwa umeboreshwa kama unicast au matangazo, na, tofauti na mtangulizi wake (RIPv1), RIPv2 inaruhusu variable urefu subnet masking (VLSM) kwenye mtandao. Vifaa kupokea habari routing kutoka majirani zao na kupitisha juu ya majirani wengine. RIP inarudia mchakato huu kila sekunde 30. Kwa upande mwingine, wakati mtandao ni imara na hakuna mabadiliko katika topolojia, RIP bado inatumisha meza yake ya routing kila sekunde 30, ambayo si ufanisi sana kwa sababu inapoteza bandwidth. Ingawa ni kuaminiwa sana kwamba wote wa habari ya meza routing ni kubadilishana kati ya majirani, kweli tu njia bora ni kubadilishana kupitia routing updates. Njia mbadala si ni pamoja na katika routing update pakiti. Kama router ambayo inatumia umbali vector routing itifaki ina habari sahihi, kwamba habari itaeneza kwa njia ya mtandao wote. Uwanja wa vector routing itifaki ni prone kwa matatizo makubwa, ikiwa ni pamoja na routing loops. Link-State Routing Protocols Link-state routing protocols si kwa ujumla <unk> njia kwa uvumi.<unk> Routing vifaa kubadilishana habari kuhusu wao kiungo-hali kati yao. Vifaa kujenga ramani ya mtandao (yaani, wao hawana kutegemea ramani ya node maalum) kujitegemea na loop-free kulingana na link-hali ya habari kila router inazalisha na kueneza kwa routers nyingine. Tofauti na distance vector routing protocols, link-state routing protocols flood information kuhusu links zake kwa eneo fulani au kwa routers zote katika eneo fulani. Kwa njia hii, kila router katika topolojia ina maarifa ya kina ya eneo maalum, tofauti na routers kutumia umbali vector routing itifaki, ambapo tu njia bora ni kubadilishana kati ya majirani. Maamuzi ya njia ni kufanywa kwa kutumia Shortest Path Kwanza (SPF) au Dijkstra ya algorithm kwa habari kupokea kutoka vyanzo mbalimbali. Matokeo ya hesabu hii inajumuisha njia fupi kwa kila marudio katika mtandao. Picha ya 3 - Link-State Routing Protocol Behavior Picha ya 3 hapo juu inaonyesha tabia ya mkataba wa kuelekeza wa hali ya kiungo. Hii ni mbinu ya ufanisi zaidi ya kujenga database routing, na hakuna fasta updated timer kama katika kesi ya teknolojia umbali vector. Link-hali itifaki re-mtiririko yao nzima routing habari mara kwa mara ili kuhakikisha kwamba mtandao ni vizuri converged. Link-hali routing itifaki kutoa mfululizo wa faida muhimu ikilinganishwa na umbali vector routing itifaki. Faida muhimu zaidi inahusiana na sababu ya kukaribia. Convergence hutokea kwa kasi zaidi kwa sababu mara tu topolojia ya mtandao inabadilika, habari maalum tu hutumwa kwa routers katika eneo fulani. Mabadiliko ya routing kuacha baada ya routers wote kujifunza kuhusu mabadiliko maalum, hivyo kupunguza haja ya bandwidth, tofauti na umbali vector routing itifaki kwamba mara kwa mara kubadilishana meza routing, hata kama hakuna mabadiliko ya topolojia hutokea. Katika kuunganisha-hali routing, updates ni triggered tu wakati kiungo-hali mabadiliko mahali fulani katika mtandao. Kulingana na itifaki ya routing kutumika, hii inaweza kumaanisha kiungo kwenda juu au chini au kubadilisha baadhi ya vigezo vyake (kwa mfano, bandwidth). Mifano ya njia za kuunganisha hali ni OSPF (Open Shortest Path First), iliyoelezwa katika RFC 2328 na IS-IS (Intermediate System-to-Intermediate System), iliyoelezwa katika RFC 1142. "Kumbuka: ""EIGRP"" (Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol) ni itifaki ya Cisco inayomilikiwa na Cisco." Ina wote umbali vector na kiungo-hali sifa. Pia inaitwa mseto au maendeleo umbali vector routing itifaki. Mipango ya Routing ya nje (External Routing Protocols) ni mfumo wa mawasiliano wa nje (external routing protocols) unaoendeshwa na mfumo wa AS (AS) na unaitwa BGPv4. Sababu kuu ya kutumia aina tofauti za itifaki za njia za kusafirisha njia nje ya mipaka ya AS ni kubadilishana kiasi kikubwa cha viingilio vya njia. Katika suala hili, nje routing itifaki msaada chaguzi maalum na vipengele kwamba ni kutumika kutekeleza sera mbalimbali. Metrics routing kwa ajili ya aina hizi za itifaki ni pamoja na vigezo zaidi kuliko kwa ajili ya itifaki ya ndani routing kwa sababu ya haja ya sera rahisi routing na kuchagua njia bora iwezekanavyo. Wakati ndani routing itifaki ni kutumika ndani ya Enterprise Mitandao, BGP ni kawaida kutumika katika ISP-kwa-ISP au ISP-kwa-Enterprise uhusiano. Tofauti na itifaki za ndani ya AS ambazo hufanya maamuzi ya njia kulingana na thamani ya kipimo, sera za itifaki za kati ya AS zinaweza pia kujumuisha sababu zingine, kama vile maamuzi ya biashara au udhaifu wa AS (kwa mfano, gharama za fedha, mtoa huduma anayependelea, mtoa huduma asiye salama, njia ya trafiki ya kijiografia, na wengine). Hizi ni kiufundi kutekelezwa kwa configuring tofauti BGP vigezo. Mfano wa kawaida ambapo matumizi ya BGP ni faida kwa sababu ya utekelezaji wake rahisi sera ni shirika kwamba ni kushikamana na ISPs nyingi (multi-homing). BGP inaweza kuunganisha na itifaki yoyote ya njia ya ndani inayotumiwa ndani ya Mtandao wa Biashara, kwa hivyo wasimamizi wana kubadilika zaidi linapokuja kuchagua itifaki ya njia ya ndani inayofaa. Mfano rahisi wa hali hii ni iliyotolewa katika Picha 4 hapa chini: Enterprise Multi-Homing Scenario: Maoni mengine kwa ajili ya Routing Protocols: Mfano mwingine muhimu wa routing protocols na kipimo cha sophistication yao ni kama wana hierarchical au flat tabia. Vifaa vya OSPF na OSI vinaweza kuundwa kwa njia ya hierarchical na kutoa upanuzi wa upanuzi. Kwa mfano, OSPF imegawanya topolojia katika maeneo mengi na hutumia dhana ya eneo la 0 (mchana), ambayo inaunganisha na kila eneo jingine katika topolojia. Njia zinaweza kufupishwa wanapokuwa wakiingia au kuondoka kwenye uti wa mgongo, ambayo husababisha ufanisi ulioongezeka na uboreshaji wa upana wa bendi. IGRP na RIP ni mifano ya itifaki za routing ambazo zinategemea tabia ya gorofa kwa sababu hazijaongezwa na hutumia muundo mmoja, bila kujali jinsi mtandao ni mkubwa. Kazi moja kwa ajili ya router ni kuchagua njia bora ya kupata kwa marudio. Ikiwa router hujifunza njia tofauti za marudio kutoka kwa itifaki tofauti, router lazima iamue ni kiambishi gani inapaswa kusikiliza. Ili kufanya uamuzi huu inatumia umbali wa kiutawala (AD). Kwa mfano, njia za OSPF (AD 110) zitapendekezwa kuliko njia za RIP (AD 120). AD thamani inawakilisha jinsi ya kuaminika maalum routing itifaki ni. "Static Pointing at IP Address: ""Static Pointing at IP Address"" ni njia ya router kuchagua njia kulingana na itifaki moja juu ya nyingine, lakini kitu kingine ambacho lazima kuamuliwa ni njia ambayo kifaa itachagua kuingia meza routing juu ya kuingia nyingine kutoka itifaki moja." Metrics ya itifaki ya routing hutumiwa kufanya uamuzi huu. Mawasiliano tofauti ya routing hutumia metriki tofauti. RIP hutumia hesabu ya hop kama kipimo, kuchagua njia bora kulingana na idadi ya chini ya routers ilipita kupitia. Hii si ufanisi sana kwa sababu njia fupi inaweza kuwa na bandwidth chini kuliko njia nyingine. OSPF ni zaidi ya maendeleo na inachukua bandwidth katika kuzingatia, kujenga kipimo aitwaye gharama. Kwa sababu bandwidth ni gharama kubwa, bandwidth ya chini ina gharama kubwa na bandwidth ya juu ina gharama ndogo. EIGRP ni hata zaidi ya kisasa na hutumia kipimo mchanganyiko, kuzingatia bandwidth na kuchelewesha maadili ya kuunda thamani ya kipimo. BGP ni mfumo wa kiufundi wa kiufundi unaotumia sifa nyingi za njia ambazo zinaweza kutumika kuhesabu njia bora. "Kumbuka: Moja ya sababu RIP ina thamani ya juu ya AD ni kwamba inatumia kipimo cha ""hops count"" ambacho si cha ufanisi sana katika mazingira magumu." Kadiri ya hali ya juu ya hesabu ya kipimo, ndivyo thamani ya AD iliyowekwa kwa itifaki tofauti za njia. Matatizo ya Routing na Uepukaji Mechanisms Kama ilivyoelezwa, umbali vector routing itifaki ni prone kwa matatizo makubwa kama matokeo ya yao simplistic "routing kwa uvumi" mbinu. Distance vector na kiungo-hali routing itifaki kutumia mbinu tofauti ili kuzuia matatizo ya routing. Utaratibu muhimu zaidi ni kama ifuatavyo: - Invalid timers: Hizi ni kutumika alama njia kama unreachable wakati updates kwa njia hizo si kupokea kwa muda mrefu. - Hop-hesabu kikomo: parameter hii alama njia kama unreachable wakati wao ni zaidi ya idadi ya kabla ya kufafanuliwa ya hops mbali. Kipimo cha hop-hesabu kwa ajili ya RIP ni 15, kama ni si kawaida kutumika katika mitandao mikubwa. Njia zisizoweza kufikiwa hazijawekwa katika meza ya njia kama njia bora. Kipimo cha hop-hesabu huzuia updates kutoka looping katika mtandao, tu kama uwanja TTL katika kichwa IP. - Triggered updates: Kipengele hiki inaruhusu update timer kuwa bypassed katika kesi ya updates muhimu. Kwa mfano, RIP 30 sekunde timer inaweza kupuuzwa kama muhimu routing update lazima kuenezwa kupitia mtandao. - Kushikilia chini timers: Kama kipimo kwa ajili ya njia fulani anaendelea kuwa mbaya, updates kwa njia hiyo si kukubaliwa kwa kipindi cha kucheleweshwa. - Asynchronous updates: Hizi kutoa utaratibu mwingine wa usalama ambayo huzuia routers kutoka mafuriko ya habari nzima routing kwa wakati mmoja. Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, OSPF inafanya kazi hii kila dakika 30. Asynchronous updates utaratibu inazalisha kuchelewa kidogo kwa kila kifaa hivyo wao si mafuriko ya habari hasa kwa wakati mmoja. Hii inaboresha matumizi ya bandwidth na uwezo wa usindikaji. - Njia sumu: Hii inazuia routers kutoka kutuma pakiti kupitia njia ambayo imekuwa batili. Distance vector routing itifaki kutumia hii kuonyesha kwamba njia ni tena kupatikana. Hii ni kukamilika kwa kuweka njia ya kipimo kwa thamani ya juu. Split Horizon: Split Horizon inazuia updates kutoka kutumwa nje ya interface moja walikuja kutoka kwa sababu routers katika eneo hilo lazima tayari kujua kuhusu kwamba update maalum. - sumu reverse: Hii ni ubaguzi wa sheria ya mstari kugawanyika kwa njia sumu. Njia ya muhtasari inatoa matokeo katika miundo ya njia ambayo ni zaidi scalable, bila kujali itifaki ya njia kutumika (kwa mfano, RIPV2, EIGRP, au OSPF), kama ni mahali anwani ya mtandao katika vitalu kutumika, ambayo inaweza kutumika kwa madhumuni mbalimbali, kwa mfano: - Vipande vya NAT - Vipande kutumika katika redistribution - Vipande kwa ajili ya usimamizi VLANs - Vipande kwa ajili ya huduma za maudhui - Njia ya muhtasari inaweza kutumika katika kati ya ukubwa wa mitandao kubwa kwa ajili ya convergence ya haraka na kusaidia huduma nyeti. Wakati wa Convergence ni kipimo kulingana na wakati SPF recalculations kuchukua nafasi katika OSPF au kuenea algorithm anaendesha katika EIGRP. Mfano wa njia ya muhtasari ni aggregating idadi ya anwani ya upatikanaji safu (172.16.30.0-24 kupitia 172.30.23.0-24), katika kiambishi moja (172.30.16.21). Aina maalum ya muhtasari wa njia inaweza kutekelezwa katika fomu ya routing default. Kila mtandao wa kisasa kwa kawaida hutumia aina fulani ya routing default. Mazoea bora ni kuendeleza njia ya default 0.0.0.0 katika shirika kutoka kwa routers ya makali, kama wanavyounganisha kwa ISP, kinyume na kufanya muundo wa njia ya kimya kwenye kila router katika shirika. Kwa njia hii, trafiki yote ya nje inaweza kuelekezwa kwa ISP. Wakati kuanzisha njia ya default ya kila router katika shirika kwa router ISP, hop ijayo ni router ISP-kuunganishwa badala ya moja kwa moja kuunganishwa peer router. Hii inaweza kuwa tatizo kama inaweza kusababisha mashimo nyeusi katika mtandao kama njia ya router ISP haipatikani. Kwa kuongezea, hii huunda overhead kubwa ya usanidi, kwani kila router lazima ibadilishwe wakati hatua ya kuondoka inabadilika au uhusiano mwingine wa ISP huongezwa kwa redundancy au upatikanaji wa juu. Tangu hii ina maana ya kutumia Configuration mwongozo, mchakato huu itajumuisha zaidi overhead. Hali ya ufanisi zaidi itakuwa Configure njia ya kimya juu ya shirika la makali vifaa, na kisha redistribute njia hiyo katika itifaki ya mwendo nguvu. Uhamisho wa nje utachukua kipimo chochote ambacho itifaki ya njia inatumia na utapata njia bora kwa ISP. Pamoja na itifaki yoyote ya routing ya ndani ( isipokuwa kwa EIGRP), amri ya "default-information originate" inaweza kutumika kuzalisha njia ya default. Hata hivyo, na EIGRP, <unk>ip default-mtandao <prefix><unk> amri lazima kutumika Configure mwisho-resort gateway au njia default. Mfumo wa EIGRP ni njia ya kuunganisha njia ya EIGRP na njia ya EIGRP, ambayo inaonyesha njia ya EIGRP ya kuunganisha njia ya EIGRP. Pamoja na tovuti-kwa- Tovuti VPN uhusiano, inaweza kuwa wazo nzuri kutangaza kampuni muhtasari njia au njia default kwa makao makuu ya kampuni. Kwa mfano, ikiwa lengo ni kutangaza njia ya 10.0.0.0 kwa maeneo ya mbali kwa kutumia EasyVPN Server na EasyVPN Remote, Reverse Route Injection (RRI) inaweza kutumika kufanya hivyo iwezekanavyo. Mipaka ya kawaida na maeneo ya stub ya OSPF Njia hii inaruhusu kwa njia ya moja kwa moja kuchuja kati ya maeneo juu ya Area Border Routers (ABRs). "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa"" ni ""Mkubwa"" na ""Mkubwa""." OSPF filters njia kati ya maeneo tu juu ya ABRs; haina filters prefixes ndani ya eneo moja (intra-eneo). Mfano wa 5 - Njia ya default katika Hub na Spoke Scenario: Katika Mfano wa 5 hapo juu, R1 ni hub (mji mkuu) katika topolojia ya hub na spoke na njia ya default kwa R1 ni matangazo kwa spokes (matawi). Sehemu za tawi ni sehemu za stub na zinajumuisha mitandao tofauti: 192.168.2.024 na 192.168.3.024 na 192.168.4.024 Wakati router ya spoke (R2, R3 au R4) inahitaji kuwasiliana na router nyingine ya spoke, hutuma trafiki kwa hub kwa sababu ya njia ya default na njia ya default inaipeleka kwa spoke maalum. Kwa njia hii, spokes hawana maarifa ya topolojia nzima ya mtandao na wao kujifunza kutuma trafiki yote ya nje kwa router kitovu. Kitu kama hicho kinaweza kupatikana na EIGRP kwa kuanzisha njia ya default kwa eneo la mbali na kuchuja viambishi vingine kwa routers stub. Njia ya kuchuja inaruhusu udhibiti wa mtiririko wa trafiki ya mtandao na inazuia trafiki isiyo ya lazima ya usafirishaji, haswa katika hali ambazo zina nyongeza au njia nyingi. Njia ya kuchuja inalinda dhidi ya updates makosa routing na kuna mbinu kadhaa ambayo inaweza kutumika katika suala hili. Kwa mfano, kama OSPF Core Layer uhusiano ni kupotea, trafiki haipaswi kuwa redirected kupitia tovuti ya mbali. Uhamiaji wa OSPF kati ya maeneo hutimizwa tu kwa kupita eneo 0 au kwa kuunda kiungo cha kawaida kama njia ya muda kwa masuala ya muundo yanayowezekana ambayo huzuia kuwa na eneo la msingi la kuendelea. Kwa EIGRP, stub routers inaweza kuwa umeboreshwa au njia nyingine kuliko njia default inaweza kuwa filtered. Kwa BGP, njia ya kuchuja inaweza kutumika kuzuia router kutoka kuwa transit kati ya ISP mbili ili kuzuia kiasi kikubwa cha trafiki kutoka kwenda kupitia mtandao. <unk>Defensive kuchuja,<unk> katika ambayo njia ya kuchuja inalinda dhidi ya haramu au yasiyotakiwa routing trafiki, pia inaweza kutekelezwa. Ni kawaida sana kwa mashirika kuwa na extranets, mitandao ya washirika, au uhusiano na washirika wengine wa biashara au kimkakati. Filtering ya ulinzi inatoa ulinzi katika hali ambapo habari isiyoidhinishwa ya njia inapatikana kutoka kwa mtandao wa mshirika wa nje (kwa mfano, mtandao ni matangazo nyuma ya kiambishi cha chuo). Bila njia ya ulinzi kuchuja, matangazo ya washirika makosa inaweza kusababisha matatizo mengi. Kwa mfano, mpenzi wa kimkakati anaweza kuwa na njia ya static kwa shamba la seva ya Microsoft SharePoint kwa sababu wanatumia huduma hizo kwenye bandari 80. Ikiwa njia hizi zinaanza kuvuja katika mchakato wa routing ya EIGRP au OSPF, basi sehemu ya mtandao wa awali inaweza kufikiri shamba la seva ya SharePoint limehamishwa kwa eneo nyuma ya router ya mshirika. Uchapishaji wa kinga utasaidia kuzuia aina hii ya hali, kwani inazuia uvujaji na usumbufu wa mtandao na huongeza usalama. Utaftaji wa ulinzi pia unajulikana kama njia ya kujificha au njia ya njaa na inaweza kutimizwa kwa kutumia mbinu mbalimbali, kwa mfano, na filters njia na kiambishi-orodha. Njia ya kugawa ni njia ya ufanisi sana ya usimamizi na usimamizi wa njia, na baadhi ya sababu muhimu zaidi za kugawa njia ni pamoja na zifuatazo: - Ni njia bora ya kudhibiti, kuendesha, na kusimamia updates routing. - Ni utaratibu muhimu wakati wa kupeleka mbili au zaidi routing itifaki. - Ni chombo chenye manufaa baada ya kuunganishwa au ununuzi umefanywa. Njia ya usambazaji upya inapaswa kutekelezwa kwa uangalifu kwa sababu inaweza kusababisha routing suboptimal na kuunda mashimo nyeusi katika mtandao. Cisco inapendekeza kuwa na mikoa tofauti ya itifaki za routing na kwa uangalifu kusambaza tena habari za routing, kinyume na kufuata mbinu ya ad-hoc ya kutekeleza itifaki za routing. Kwa kuongezea, ikiwa kuna viungo zaidi ya moja kati ya maeneo mawili ya mtandao kwa kutumia itifaki tofauti za njia (kwa mfano, EIGRP na OSPF), usambazaji wa pande zote mbili unaweza kuzingatiwa, na usambazaji wa OSPF kuwa EIGRP na EIGRP kuwa OSPF. Wakati wa kutekeleza usambazaji wa pande zote, ni muhimu kuzuia matangazo ya habari kurudi katika eneo la njia ambalo lilitoka awali. Picha ya 6 - EIGRP kwa OSPF Njia ya Ugawaji: Uchambuzi Picha ya 6 hapo juu, vichungi hutumiwa kuzuia habari ya OSPF iliyosambazwa tena katika habari ya EIGRP kutoka kwa kutangazwa tena katika sehemu ya OSPF ya shirika. Hii ni mara nyingi inajulikana kama <unk>manual kugawanywa upeo wa macho.<unk> Kama kuchuja si kutumika na kuna kutofautisha, routing loops au tabia ya ajabu convergence inaweza kuonekana na hii inaongoza kwa kutokuwa na utulivu katika kubuni mtandao. OSPF na EIGRP pia huunga mkono njia ya kuweka alama, ambayo inawezesha mchakato huu. Ramani ya njia inaweza kutumika kuongeza prefixes tarakimu tag-specific. Taarifa ya tag ni kupita pamoja katika routing updates na routers nyingine inaweza kuchuja njia kwamba mechi au si mechi tags maalum. Hii inaweza kutimizwa kwa kutumia ramani za njia katika orodha za usambazaji. "Hii ni kwa sababu ""Tag"" inatumika kwa alama za 10 na 90 ambazo zinaonyesha alama za ""OSPF"" na ""EIGRP""." Ingawa hii si lazima, ni mapendekezo bora ya mazoezi wakati wa kufanya tata redistribution kwa sababu mbinu hii husaidia kwa urahisi kutambua itifaki ya awali ambayo kuzalishwa kila njia. Migration ya itifaki ya Routing: Kuna hali ambazo zinahitaji kuhamia kati ya itifaki za routing, kwa mfano, ambapo kampuni moja inunuliwa na kampuni kubwa ambayo ina sera ya usalama ambayo inazuia matumizi ya itifaki yoyote ya wamiliki mahali popote katika shirika. Ikiwa kampuni inayonunuliwa hapo awali ilitumia EIGRP, ingekuwa na kuhamia haraka kwa OSPF kufuata sera ya shirika jipya. Kuna njia mbili za kuhamia kati ya itifaki za routing: - Kutumia AD: Hii inahusisha kugeuza itifaki mpya (OSPF katika mfano hapo juu) na kisha kuhakikisha kuwa ina AD ya juu kuliko itifaki ya routing ya EIGRP iliyopo. Utaratibu huu unawezesha OSPF na inaruhusu adjacency na routing database kutajwa, lakini si kweli kutegemea OSPF routing itifaki kwa ajili ya maamuzi routing. Wakati OSPF ni kikamilifu kupelekwa, AD inaweza kubadilishwa kwa moja ya itifaki mbili hivyo OSPF itakuwa si kuwa na AD chini. Uhamisho wa Redistribution: Uhamisho wa Redistribution ni hatua ya kuhamisha sehemu tofauti ya mtandao kutoka kwa itifaki moja ya routing hadi nyingine (EIGRP hadi OSPF). Ili kuhamia kati ya itifaki za routing katika shirika kubwa la biashara, mbinu ya kwanza (kubadilisha AD) mara nyingi ni chaguo bora. Ili kufikia muunganisho kamili kwa kutumia chaguo la pili (uhamiaji kwa usambazaji), njia za mpaka kati ya sehemu mbili za mitandao itabidi kusambazwa kwa pande mbili kati ya itifaki mbili za njia. Kisha, kuchuja inaweza kutekelezwa kwa kutumia utaratibu wa tagging zilizotajwa hapo awali. Baada ya mchakato huu, mipaka routers itakuwa <unk>hamia<unk> kama zaidi ya shirika ni kuhamishwa kwa itifaki mpya routing. EIGRP ni itifaki ya kipekee kwa sababu inatumia mbinu ya mseto, kuunganisha umbali vector na kiungo-hali sifa. Kuchanganya sifa hizi hufanya EIGRP imara sana na inaruhusu mkusanyiko wa haraka, hata katika topolojia kubwa. EIGRP ni Cisco proprietary itifaki, hivyo inaweza kutumika tu katika mazingira ambayo yana Cisco vifaa. RIPv2 ni protocol ya classless ambayo inasaidia VLSM. Mfano mwingine kati ya itifaki mbili ni tabia yao ya muhtasari wa moja kwa moja, lakini hii inaweza kuzimwa kwa urahisi. Algorithm ambayo EIGRP hutumia inaitwa Algorithm ya Sasisho la Kuenea (DUAL). Dual ni injini ambayo inafanya EIGRP kama itifaki nguvu. DUAL inafanya kazi kulingana na meza ya topolojia ambayo ina viambishi vyote vinavyowezekana na habari juu ya jinsi ya kufikia viambishi hivyo. Jedwali topolojia ni kutumika kutambua prefix bora, aitwaye mrithi, na huweka njia hii katika meza routing. Baada ya kuamua njia bora katika meza topolojia, EIGRP hutambua njia ya pili bora aitwaye mrithi uwezekano. Wafuasi uwezekano si imewekwa katika meza routing mpaka njia bora ni waliopotea. Wakati huo, mrithi bora wa pili katika meza ya topolojia imewekwa katika meza ya njia karibu mara moja kwa sababu hakuna haja ya mahesabu mengine. Hii ni sababu EIGRP hutoa nyakati za haraka za makutano. EIGRP ni moja ya njia za kuunganisha gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama za gharama. Hii ni kukamilika kwa kutumia <unk>variance<unk> amri, ambayo hufafanua tolerance multiplier ambayo inaweza kutumika kwa kipimo bora na kwamba itasababisha kipimo cha juu kuruhusiwa. Picha ya 7 - EIGRP: Usawa wa Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama ya Gharama Kwa default, EIGRP hufanya tu sawa gharama mzigo uwiano, hivyo itatuma trafiki katika viungo viwili vya kwanza tu, ambayo kuwa na kipimo bora ya 100. Ikiwa trafiki ilitumwa kupitia kiungo cha tatu, kutofautiana kunapaswa kuwekwa kwa 2, ikimaanisha kipimo cha juu kinachoruhusiwa ni mara mbili ya kipimo cha chini, sawa na 200. Trafiki itatumwa kwa usawa kwa kipimo, ikimaanisha kwa kila pakiti iliyotumwa kupitia kiungo cha tatu, pakiti mbili hutumwa kupitia viungo viwili vya kwanza kwa sababu kipimo chao ni bora. EIGRP huunda mahusiano ya jirani na njia zilizo karibu na kubadilishana habari nao kwa kutumia Reliable Transport Protocol (RTP). Itifaki hii inahakikisha kwamba majirani wanaweza kubadilishana habari kwa njia ya kuaminika. Kumbuka: Usibadilishane RTP (Reliable Transport Protocol) maalum ya EIGRP na itifaki ya usafirishaji wa wakati halisi inayotumiwa katika mazingira ya VoIP. Kwa default, EIGRP mahesabu njia metrics kulingana na bandwidth na kuchelewa, lakini inaweza kutumia vigezo vingine katika mahesabu, ikiwa ni pamoja na mzigo na kuegemea. Kuwezesha hesabu ya kipimo kulingana na mzigo na kuegemea haipendekezi na Cisco kwa sababu mtandao unaweza kuwa na ukosefu wa utulivu. EIGRP inatoa kubadilika zaidi kuliko OSPF, ambayo ni ngumu zaidi na inaongozwa zaidi na kuzingatia uendeshaji na kiufundi. Biashara ndogo na ya kati na usanifu wa mtandao wa hiari inaweza kutumia EIGRP bila matatizo mengi kwa sababu mtandao hauhitaji kuundwa upya hadi upanaji hadi topolojia kubwa. Hata hivyo, kama topolojia inafikia hatua ambapo kuna mamia ya routers, basi EIGRP inaweza kuwa imara na sasa muda mrefu convergence. Wakati scaling EIGRP, imepangwa IP hierarchy lazima ni pamoja na njia nzuri muhtasari. "Sehemu muhimu zaidi ya EIGRP inayohusiana na utulivu na mwingiliano ni kujaribu kupunguza kuenea kwa maswali ya EIGRP, haswa wakati wa kujaribu kupata mrithi anayewezekana. """ Moja ya mambo muhimu ya kubuni scalable EIGRP (hasa katika upanuzi kubwa) ni kuhakikisha kwamba kuna vifungu viwezekani. Hii inaweza kupatikana kwa njia ya ufanisi sawa gharama routing kubuni. Kwa kuongezea, pointi za muhtasari na njia zilizofunikwa zinaweza pia kupunguza kuenea kwa maswali ya EIGRP na kupunguza nyakati za mkusanyiko. Kusahihisha muda wa kuchelewesha na tuning kutumia kutofautiana, tofauti na mtu anaweza kufikiri, ni suluhisho suboptimal wakati kujaribu kufikia muda wa chini convergence kwa sababu hii itakuwa karibu haiwezekani kufanya kama mtandao scales kwa mamia ya routers. Njia nyingine ya chini ya optimum mashirika mengi wamejaribu kufikia muda wa chini convergence ni kutekeleza ASs nyingi EIGRP au taratibu namba. Kuongeza kwa kiwango cha EIGRP kwa AS mbili au tatu ili kupunguza maswali ya EIGRP imethibitishwa kuwa suluhisho lisilo na ufanisi. Kuwepo kwa mifumo mingi ya EIGRP itakuwa haki katika idadi ndogo ya matukio, ambayo ya kawaida ni kama ifuatavyo: - Baada ya kuunganisha au ununuzi, kama mkakati wa uhamiaji. - Kuwa na makundi tofauti ya usimamizi wa ASs tofauti za EIGRP, ambayo ni chaguo la chini la optimum kwa sababu hii itasababisha kiwango kikubwa cha utata katika miundombinu ya mtandao; hata hivyo, inaweza kuwa muhimu kuwa na maeneo tofauti ya uaminifu au mipaka ya udhibiti wa kiutawala. - Kuwa na shirika na mtandao mkubwa sana ambayo hutumia ASs nyingi za EIGRP kugawanya mtandao. Hii itahusisha kutumia njia za muhtasari katika mipaka ya AS kutangaza vitalu vya viambishi katika mtandao mkubwa. Njia bora za kupunguza maswali ya EIGRP na kufikia muundo wa EIGRP unaoweza kupanuliwa ni kama ifuatavyo: - Kutumia muundo thabiti wa muhtasari - Kutumia orodha za usambazaji - Kutumia stubs - Kuhakikisha kuna wafuasi wanaofaa - Kutekeleza njia sawa ya gharama - Kuepuka kuwa na njia nyingi za EIGRP - Kuepuka kiwango cha EIGRP nyingi, ikiwa inawezekana. OSPF ni wazi-kiwango itifaki, ambapo EIGRP si. OSPF ni classless routing itifaki na hii inaruhusu ni kusaidia VLSM. OSPF hutumia algorithm ya Dijkstra SPF kuchagua njia zisizo na kitanzi katika topolojia, wakati EIGRP hutumia DUAL. OSPF ni iliyoundwa kuwa sana scalable kwa sababu ni hierarchical routing itifaki, kutumia dhana ya <unk>areas<unk> kugawanya topology katika sehemu ndogo. OSPF kwa kawaida haifanyi haraka kama EIGRP, lakini inatoa updating na convergence, kwa kuwa inachukua bandwidth katika kuzingatia wakati wa kuhesabu njia metrics. Bandwidth ya juu inazalisha gharama ya chini na gharama za chini hupendekezwa katika OSPF. OSPF inasaidia uthibitisho, kama vile EIGRP na RIPv2, na inaweza kupanuliwa sana, kama vile BGP na ISP, ikimaanisha kwamba itifaki inaweza kubadilishwa katika siku zijazo kushughulikia aina nyingine za trafiki. OSPF hugundua majirani na kubadilishana habari topolojia na wao, kutenda sana kama EIGRP. Kulingana na data zilizokusanywa na gharama za kiungo, OSPF inahesabu njia fupi kwa kila marudio kwa kutumia algorithm ya SPF. Fomula kwa ajili ya kuhesabu gharama ya interface ni rejea bandwidth / kiungo bandwidth. default bandwidth ni 100 Mbps lakini hii inaweza kubadilishwa, kama inaweza kiungo bandwidth kutumia <unk>bandwidth<unk> amri. Kwa mfano, bandwidth ya kumbukumbu inapaswa kubadilishwa katika mitandao ambayo ina mchanganyiko wa viungo vya 100Mbps na 1Gbps, kwa sababu, kwa default, viunganishi vyote vya OSPF vitapewa gharama sawa. Jambo jingine ambalo linaongeza ugumu wa muundo wa OSPF ni kwamba inaweza kusanidiwa kutenda tofauti kulingana na topolojia ambayo inatekelezwa. OSPF inatambua aina tofauti za mtandao na hii itadhibiti masuala kama vile: Jinsi ya kusafirisha updates, jinsi ya kuunganisha kati ya wasemaji wa OSPF, jinsi ya kuhesabu hop inayofuata, OSPF inasaidia aina sita za mtandao: Point-to-multipoint, non-broadcast, na OSPF inafanya kazi nzuri ya kuchagua aina ya mtandao ambayo inafaa zaidi kwa teknolojia fulani. Kwa mfano, Configuring OSPF katika mazingira ya Ethernet broadcast-msingi itakuwa default kwa aina ya utangazaji; Configuring OSPF juu ya Frame Relay kiungo kimwili itakuwa default kwa aina ya non-broadcast; na Configuring OSPF juu ya hatua-kwa-pointi serial kiungo itakuwa default kwa aina ya mtandao hatua-kwa-pointi. Aina mbili za mtandao ambazo hazitumiwi moja kwa moja ni uhakika-kwa-multipoint na uhakika-kwa-multipoint zisizo za utangazaji. Hizi ni sahihi zaidi kwa ajili ya sehemu ya mesh (hub-na-spoke) mazingira na lazima manually umeboreshwa. Aina ya mtandao inaweza kuathiri msingi OSPF itifaki kwa njia nyingi. Aina ya utangazaji itakuwa default kwenye vyombo vya habari vya utangazaji, na mara OSPF imewekwa kwenye mazingira ya utangazaji, mifumo itachagua Router iliyoteuliwa (DR) na, kwa hiari, Router iliyoteuliwa ya Backup (BDR) kwenye kila sehemu. Kwa hivyo, kwa kuwasiliana na DRs, OSPF itatuma sasisho kwa 18.104.22.168, na kwa kuwasiliana na kila router ya OSPF, pakiti hutumwa kwa 22.214.171.124. Katika mtandao wa utangazaji, DR ni kifaa ambacho routers nyingine zote zitaunda ujirani wao na hii ni utaratibu wa ulinzi ili kuzuia mtandao usichukuliwe na mesh kamili ya ujirani. Pamoja na kupunguza adjacency, DR pia husaidia kupunguza kiasi cha OSPF trafiki kati ya nodes OSPF kwa sababu inaanzisha kamili OSPF adjacency tu na DR. BDR ni node ambayo itachukua nafasi ya DR ikiwa itashindwa. Katika sehemu ya OSPF ya matangazo, ikiwa kila node inapaswa kuunda adjacencies kwa kubadilishana habari na majirani zake wote, idadi ya mahusiano ya jumla ya jirani itakuwa n * n - 1 2 ambapo n ni idadi ya routers. Kutumia DR husaidia kupunguza jumla ya idadi ya adjacencies na hufanya mchakato ufanisi zaidi kwa sababu nodes hawana haja ya mesh kamili ya mahusiano. OSPF Router Aina: OSPF hierarchy hutumia dhana ya maeneo ya kuboresha scalability ya itifaki. Mipango ya hali ya kiungo hufanya kazi kwa kufurika habari kuhusu hali ya viungo vyao, lakini wakati mtandao umegawanywa katika maeneo, tu routers katika eneo maalum lazima kukubaliana juu ya ramani ya topolojia. Kuanzisha maeneo hupunguza ukubwa wa uwanja wa makutano kwa sababu hii inaweza kuficha maelezo ya topolojia kati ya maeneo. Hii inaongoza kwa itifaki kuwa na ufanisi zaidi. Eneo 0 (mgongo) ni eneo muhimu katika mazingira ya OSPF, na kila muundo wa OSPF lazima uanze kutoka eneo hili. "Hii inaitwa ""Eneo la Usafiri"" kwa sababu maeneo yote yanapaswa kuunganishwa na eneo hilo na trafiki kati ya maeneo lazima ipite kupitia eneo la 0." Kipengele kingine cha eneo la uti wa mgongo ni kwamba lazima liwe na ukaribu, ikimaanisha kwamba haliwezi kugawanywa katika sehemu nyingi. Mara baada ya eneo la mgongo ni iliyoundwa, maeneo mengine, aitwaye maeneo yasiyo ya usafiri, inaweza kujumuishwa na wanaweza kupewa namba yoyote. "Kama ilivyoelezwa katika picha ya chini, ""Mipangilio ya eneo la OSPF na majukumu ya router"" ni maneno ya kawaida ya ""router"" ambayo hutumiwa na router ya msingi, ambayo ni sehemu ya eneo la OSPF." - Router ndani: Router hii ina viungo vyote kushiriki katika moja isiyo ya usafiri eneo. Area Border Router (ABR) - Router ya eneo la mpakani (ABR) ni router ya eneo la mpakani (ABR) ambayo inapatikana katika maeneo kadhaa. Hii ina maana router ina angalau moja kiungo kwa Area 0 na moja kiungo kwa eneo lisilo la usafiri. ABRs kupitisha habari kati ya eneo backbone na maeneo yasiyo ya usafiri. Pia hutumiwa kuelezea habari kati ya maeneo mawili, hivyo kuboresha ufanisi na scalability ya kubuni OSPF. Autonomous System Boundary Router (ASBR) - ni mfumo wa kujitegemea wa mfumo wa kujitegemea (ASBR) ambao una uhusiano mmoja wa ndani na nje ya uwanja wa OSPF na unashikilia itifaki nyingine ya njia (ISRP, BGP, au EIG). ASBR hutumiwa kusambaza habari kwa na kutoka kwa maeneo mengine ya njia na OSPF. Kama eneo backbone ni kugawanywa katika vipande vingi, viungo virtual inaweza kuhakikisha mwendelezo wake. Virtual link ni eneo la 0 handaki ambayo inaunganisha maeneo ya backbone dispersed. Viungo vya Virtual si kuchukuliwa bora kubuni mazoezi, lakini wanaweza kuwa na manufaa katika hali maalum, kama vile kuunganishwa kampuni, kama ilivyoonyeshwa katika Picha 9 hapa chini: Picha 9 <unk> OSPF Virtual Link (Mfano 1) Kiungo virtual ni umeboreshwa kati ya ABRs kama fix muda kwa tatizo (kugawanywa Area 0). Kiungo virtual tunnels eneo backbone kati ya vifaa hivyo topology ni kurekebishwa mpaka mtandao redesign ni kutekelezwa. Kesi nyingine ya kawaida ambayo viungo virtual inaweza kutumika ni hali ambayo kuna eneo OSPF si kushikamana na mgongo. Kwa mfano, katika picha ya chini, eneo la 100 linaunganishwa na eneo la 0, lakini eneo la 200 linaunganishwa tu na eneo la 100. Hii inaonyesha tatizo la kubuni kwa sababu inapita dhidi ya kanuni ambayo inasema kwamba kila eneo lazima liunganishwe na Eneo 0. Kwa mfano, kuna uwezekano wa kuunda uhusiano wa virtual kati ya eneo la 0 na eneo la 200 ili kupanua kiganja cha mtandao hadi eneo la 200. "Kama ilivyoelezwa katika picha ya 10, ""kiungo virtual"" ni mara nyingi kuchukuliwa upanuzi wa eneo lisilo la usafiri (eneo 200 katika kesi hii) kufikia eneo 0." Hii si kweli kwa sababu kiungo virtual ni sehemu ya eneo 0, hivyo kwa kweli eneo 0 ni kupanuliwa kufikia eneo lisilo la usafiri (eneo 200 katika kesi hii). Sehemu nyingine muhimu ya OSPF inawakilishwa na aina tofauti za Matangazo ya Jimbo la Kiungo (LSA). Kila aina ya LSA ina muundo wa kipekee ambao hufafanuliwa na aina ya habari inayomo (yaani prefixes ya ndani au ya nje). Aina ya LSA ni kama ifuatavyo: Aina ya 1 - Router LSA: Inatumiwa na routers katika eneo moja kutangaza kiungo kwa router nyingine katika eneo moja. Aina ya 2 - Mtandao LSA: Imetengenezwa na DR kutuma updates kuhusu routers kushikamana. Aina ya 3 <unk> Network Summary LSA: Imetengenezwa na ABR kutangaza habari kutoka eneo moja hadi jingine. Aina ya 4 - ASBR Summary LSA: Imetengenezwa na ABR kutuma habari kuhusu eneo la ASBR. Aina ya 5 - LSA ya nje: Inatumiwa na ASBR kutangaza viambishi vya nje kwa uwanja wa OSPF. Aina ya 6 - Multicast LSA: Haijaanzishwa na Cisco Aina ya 7 (NSSA) - LSA ya nje: Inatumiwa katika maeneo yasiyo na stubby ili kutangaza viambishi vya nje. - Aina 8, 9, na 10 <unk> Opaque LSA: Inatumiwa kwa ajili ya extensibility. LSAs ni aina ya LSA ambayo hutiririka ndani ya eneo (maeneo ya ndani): Aina 1 na 2 (O) LSAs ambayo hutiririka kati ya maeneo (maeneo ya ndani): Aina 3 na 4 (O, IA) Njia za nje: Aina 5 (E, E, E, E) au Aina 7 (N, N, F) LSAs ni aina ya eneo. Aina tofauti za eneo ni kama ifuatavyo: - Eneo la kawaida: Hii ni eneo la kawaida la OSPF, bila vizuizi katika mtiririko wa LSA. - Stub eneo: Eneo hili huzuia nje Aina 5 LSAs kutoka kuingia eneo hilo. LSA ya Aina ya 4 ni sawa na LSA ya Aina ya 5. - eneo kabisa stubby: Eneo hili huzuia aina 5, aina 4, na aina 3 LSAs kutoka kuingia eneo hilo. Njia default ni moja kwa moja injected kufikia malengo ya ndani. Kwa mfano, eneo la stubby (NSA) ni eneo ambalo linatumia LSA ya aina ya 4 na 5 lakini linaweza kuunganisha na maeneo mengine na ASBR inaweza kuwa katika eneo hili. NSF haina kupokea njia za nje zilizopigwa katika maeneo mengine lakini inaweza kuingiza njia za nje katika uwanja wa OSPF. Njia za nje zitapigwa kama LSA za Aina ya 7. LSAs aina 7 ni kubadilisha kwa LSAs aina 5 kwa kutumia NSR (router ambayo inaunganisha na backbone), na kufikia maeneo mengine ya OSPF kama LSAs aina 5. Kwa kweli, eneo la NSW lina sifa sawa na NSW, isipokuwa kwamba pia huzuia LSAs ya Aina ya 3 kuingia katika eneo hilo. Kumbuka: Routers wote katika eneo OSPF lazima kukubaliana juu ya bendera stub. Sehemu mbalimbali na aina LSA ni muhtasari katika Picha 11 hapa chini: Picha 11 <unk> OSPF maeneo na aina LSA <unk> Sehemu hizi zote na aina LSA kufanya OSPF hierarchical sana na scalable routing itifaki ambayo inaweza tweaked na tuned kwa mazingira kubwa sana kulingana na wote wa mambo haya ya kubuni. LSAs ya aina ya 5 na aina ya 7 ni pamoja na: - LSAs ya aina ya 5 na aina ya 7 (ASB) - LSAs ya aina ya 5 na aina ya 7 (ASB) - LSAs ya aina ya 5 na aina ya 7 (ASB) - LSAs ya aina ya 5 na aina ya 7 (ASB). - LSAs ya aina ya 5 na aina ya 7 (ASB) - LSAs ya aina ya 7 (ASB) - LSAs ya aina ya 7 (ASB). OSPF itaondoa mabadiliko yote ya hali ya kiungo kwa wote wa routers katika eneo. Kwa kawaida, router moja haipaswi kuwa na majirani zaidi ya 60. - Idadi ya routers jirani katika eneo. Kwa kawaida, hakuna router zaidi ya 50 katika eneo la OSPF. Katika hali ambapo idadi kubwa ya maeneo inaweza kuwa zinahitajika, topolojia inaweza kugawanywa katika maeneo mengi. - idadi ya maeneo mkono na kila router. Kwa kuwa kila ABR iko katika angalau maeneo mawili (mzizi na eneo moja la karibu), kwa utulivu wa juu, router moja haipaswi kuwa katika maeneo zaidi ya matatu. Kwa mujibu wa kanuni hii, ABR inapaswa kugusa uti wa mgongo na maeneo mengine mawili. Mapendekezo haya ya kubuni inategemea idadi ya jumla ya routers na juu ya idadi ya routers katika eneo moja. - Kuchagua router maalum. DRs na BDRs ni "busiest" routers katika topolojia ya OSPF kwa sababu wao kuanzisha kamili OSPF adjacencies na routers nyingine zote OSPF. Routers sahihi lazima kuchaguliwa kutekeleza kazi hizi, kwa mfano, routers ambayo inaweza kusimamia CPU ya juu na kumbukumbu mizigo. Kuepuka kuchagua router sawa kuwa DR katika LANs nyingi kwa wakati mmoja. Katika hali ambapo kuna matawi mengi au routers mbali, mzigo wa kazi inapaswa kugawanywa katika wenzao kadhaa. Kwa mfano, IPsec VPN peers kuendesha OSPF juu ya GRE vichuguu fomu mazingira chini ya imara kuliko mazingira yasiyo ya VPN. Upimaji sahihi wa maabara unapaswa kufanywa kabla ya kutekeleza mtandao wa uzalishaji. EIGRP ni rahisi zaidi na uvumilivu kwa ad hoc mtandao topolojia, lakini OSPF inahitaji vizuri kufafanuliwa utaratibu na wazi mgongo na eneo topolojia. Maelezo ya njia inaweza kupunguzwa kwa kuwa na kubuni nzuri eneo. Watengenezaji wa OSPF wanapaswa kutumia mbinu za kupunguza idadi ya matangazo ya kuingia na kutoka eneo. LSA lazima itumiwe kwa routers zote katika eneo, kwa hivyo wakati wowote mabadiliko yanahitaji kuenezwa, CPU, kumbukumbu, na vipimo vya upana wa bendi zitaathiriwa. Mtengenezaji wa mtandao anapaswa kuwa wa kihafidhina katika kuongeza routers kwa Eneo 0. Ikiwa ni lazima, eneo hili linapaswa kuwa na njia za msingi za msingi na ABRs ili kuunganisha maeneo mengine ya OSPF. Ikiwa muundo wa OSPF hauwezi kurahisishwa, kila eneo lisilo la mgongo linapaswa kuwa na aina fulani ya eneo la stub au eneo la stubby kabisa. Solid muhtasari mbinu pia inapaswa kutumika kujenga scalable OSPF kubuni. Mfano wa msingi wa mtandao wa mtandao ni kuamua kama router ya msingi ya msingi au ya usambazaji. Hii inategemea topolojia ya mtandao katika shirika. Miongozo ya jumla inapendekeza kuweka maeneo tofauti ya mtandao wa kazi katika maeneo tofauti ya OSPF. Mfano wa 12 - Mfano wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa 12 wa Mfumo wa OSPF unajumuisha: Kituo cha data au mkono wa seva; eneo la Chuo cha Biashara; topolojia ya hub-na-spoke kwa ofisi za kikanda; na uwezo wa kuunga mkono muhtasari wa njia au kuunda maeneo ya stubby au kabisa stubby. Ufanisi wa njia ya muhtasari itategemea kabisa juu ya jinsi nzuri ya kushughulikia mpango na uongozi ni. Baadhi ya miongozo kuhusu muhtasari ndani na nje ya maeneo ni pamoja na zifuatazo: - Configure anwani mpango hivyo mbalimbali ya subnets kupewa ndani ya eneo ni contiguous. - Kuendeleza mpango wa nafasi ya anwani ambayo itakuwa rahisi kugawanya kama mtandao inakua. - Kutuma subnets kulingana na mipaka rahisi octet, ambapo inawezekana. - Daima kupanga mbele kwa ajili ya routers mpya na maeneo mapya. - Hakikisha kwamba routers mpya ni kuwekwa vizuri kama ABRs, backbone routers, au aina nyingine ya routers. Njia zinaweza kufupishwa na ukubwa wa hifadhidata ya LSA na mafuriko yanaweza kupunguzwa katika OSPF kwa kutumia amri ya <unk> eneo la eneo <unk> (fupisho la ndani) na amri ya <unk> muhtasari-anwani <unk> (fupisho la nje), kwa kutekeleza kuchuja, au kwa kuanzisha njia za default katika maeneo fulani. Aina tofauti ya njia pia inaweza kuchujwa katika stub na maeneo kabisa stubby. Hifadhi ya Hub-na-Spoke Topolojia ya Hub-na-Spoke katika Picha 13 hapa chini inapaswa kubuniwa kwa uangalifu, kama kuzingatia maalum kuhusiana na aina hii ya topolojia. Wasanifu wa mtandao wanapaswa kuzingatia ukweli kwamba mabadiliko yoyote yaliyofanywa kwenye moja ya spokes yatapelekwa kwa hub na kisha kuiga kwa spokes nyingine zote. Hii tabia inaweza kuweka kiasi kikubwa cha overhead juu ya router kitovu na hii inaitwa <unk>mabadiliko mafuriko.<unk> Ili kuzuia suala hili, kutumia stub maeneo, kabisa stubby maeneo, au kabisa NSSAs. Picha 13 OSPF Hub-na-Spoke Router Katika hub-na-spoke matukio, idadi ya spokes na eneo uteuzi vigezo lazima kudhibitiwa kwa uangalifu. Kama kuna maeneo machache ya mbali (spokes), kitovu na spokes inaweza kuwekwa ndani ya eneo moja. Hata hivyo, kama kuna maeneo mengi ya mbali, spokes inaweza kuhitaji kugawanywa katika maeneo zaidi, ambayo ingekuwa kusababisha utekelezaji wa kubuni multi-eneo. Kwa ujumla, katika maeneo ya mbali, hub lazima iwe ABR. Mazoea mengine mazuri ni kubuni mtandao wa OSPF ili uwe na eneo dogo na thabiti sana la 0 kwa sababu eneo la mgongo ni muhimu katika topolojia ya OSPF. "Kumbuka: ""Mfumo wa msingi wa eneo la msingi unajumuisha kuunganisha ABRs katika eneo la 0." Kama spokes na viungo ya kasi ya chini, viungo kasi inapaswa kuongezeka ili kuboresha kubuni. Kutokuwa na bandwidth ya kutosha ya mafuriko ya LSA wakati kuna mabadiliko ya topolojia ni suala kubwa. OSPF ina chaguzi kadhaa kwa aina ya mitandao ya kutumia. Cisco inashauri kuepuka matumizi ya aina za mtandao wa Broadcast au Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) na badala yake kutumia moja ya aina zifuatazo: - Interface moja kwenye kitovu cha mawasiliano, kuchukuliwa kama mtandao wa uhakika-kwa-multi-point; - Interfaces za mtu binafsi za uhakika-kwa-point kwenye kitovu kwa kila spoke na jina la uhakika-kwa-point; OSPF Full-Mesh Design (OSPF) - Mtazamo wa Mesh kamili; - Baadhi ya mashirika yanahitaji kupeleka OSPF yao au wenzao katika topolojia ya full-mesh. Matatizo ya kufurika katika topolojia ya full-mesh ya OSPF ni kwamba ni ngumu sana na haiwezi kupanuliwa. Topolojia ya full-mesh ina maana ya idadi ya jumla ya uhusiano sawa na n * (n-1)/2, ambapo <unk>n<unk> ni sawa na idadi ya nodes. Ikiwa kuna majirani nane wa OSPF, basi viungo 28 kati ya nodes zote zitahitajika. Kuongeza router moja zaidi kwa topolojia ya full-mesh ya OSPF ingeongeza idadi ya viungo kutoka 28 hadi 36, ambayo haiwezi kupanuliwa. Kuanzisha utekelezaji huu, OSPF <unk>mesh kundi<unk> inaweza kutumika. Hii ni mbinu ya mwongozo ya kupunguza mafuriko na inafanya kazi kwa kuchagua routers mbili (DRs) kushughulikia mchakato wa mafuriko na kuchuja routers nyingine zote. "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""OSPF Full-Mesh Topology"" ni mfumo wa utangazaji wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao wa mtandao." Wakati wa kutumia uhakika-kwa-multipoint mitandao, <unk> jirani <ip_address> database-filter wote nje<unk> amri katika routing Configuration mode inaweza kutumika. "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""OSPF Flood Reduction"" ni njia ya kuondoa mafuriko ya LSA ambayo inaweza kuathiri CPU na bandwidth." Kipengele hiki inaweza kuwa umeboreshwa kwa kutumia <unk>ip ospf mafuriko-kupunguza<unk> amri katika ngazi ya interface. Kipengele hiki huondoa refresh ya mara kwa mara ya LSAs unmodified, ambayo hupunguza athari juu ya rasilimali router. Jambo muhimu la kukumbuka ni kwamba kupunguza mafuriko ya OSPF huondoa athari tu; haishughuliki na suala la msingi la muundo wa OSPF usiofaa. Hii inapaswa kutumika pamoja na baadhi ya miongozo zilizotajwa hapo awali kurekebisha masuala halisi ya OSPF ambayo hufuata: - Routers nyingi sana katika eneo au adjacencies nyingi sana - Ubunifu wa OSPF usio thabiti - Mzigo mzito wa kazi ya adjacency - Topolojia kubwa ya mesh kamili ambayo hutumia makundi ya mesh, ambayo haitoi matokeo bora ya OSPF Fast Convergence. Hii ni kutekelezwa kwa kuweka muda wa kufa kwa sekunde moja na kutumia hello multiplier kuteua jinsi wengi hello pakiti itakuwa kutumwa katika muda wa sekunde moja. Kutumia hellos haraka ni ilipendekeza katika ndogo-kwa kati-ukubwa wa mitandao lakini hawapaswi kutumika katika mitandao kubwa. Hii inaweza kutoa convergence haraka lakini si ufumbuzi scalable. Mtengenezaji wa mtandao anapaswa kuelewa tabia ya SPF algorithm katika mazingira ya OSPF ili kupata convergence ya haraka. Utendaji huu inategemea idadi ya nodes, viungo, na LSAs katika eneo hilo. I-SPF (Incremental SPF) ni algorithm ya Dijkstra iliyobadilishwa ambayo inahesabu sehemu ya mti wa njia ambayo imebadilishwa. Kufanya hili badala ya kuhesabu mti mzima itatoa kasi zaidi OSPF convergence na kupunguza CPU overhead. I-SPF imekuwa inapatikana tangu iOS 12.3 T, na majaribio ya maabara yameonyesha kwamba i-SPF kutumika juu ya 10,000 nodes alitoa 50 ms wakati convergence. iSPF ni kutekelezwa kwa kutumia <unk>ispf<unk> amri chini ya mchakato wa OSPF. Suala jingine kuhusiana na router convergence ni jinsi ya kugundua kushindwa kiungo. Hii ni kawaida kupatikana kwa kutumia aina fulani ya utaratibu wa kuweka hai au ishara ya umeme ambayo husaidia katika kugundua hasara ya kiungo. Teknolojia maalum kutumika kwa madhumuni haya ni Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD). BFD ni teknolojia ya itifaki ya routing ambayo hutumia haraka Layer 2 kiungo hello kuarifu mhandisi wa viungo vyovyote kushindwa au viungo moja-njia. BFD inasaidia juu ya majukwaa mengi ya Cisco, ikiwa ni pamoja na 6500, 7600, 12000, na CRS routers. Hii ni njia moja ya kuanzisha subsecond Layer 2 kushindwa kugundua kati ya nodes jirani mtandao. Mipango ya routing inaweza pia kuwa umeboreshwa ili kujibu taarifa za BFD na mara moja kuanza mchakato wa Layer 3 njia convergence. Border Gateway Protocol ni tu nje gateway itifaki katika matumizi ya leo na jukumu lake ni hasa kubadilishana habari routing kati ya mashirika. BGP ni itifaki ya kawaida iliyofafanuliwa katika RFC 4271 na ni mrithi wa EGP (Exterior Gateway Protocol). BGP ni njia ya mawasiliano kati ya AS na ni njia ya mawasiliano ya vector. Maamuzi ya routing ni msingi juu ya sifa nyingi ambayo inaweza kuwa tuned na kudhibitiwa, na kusababisha njia maalum AS data itachukua (yaani, hii ni uamuzi routing). Hii ni zaidi ya sera ya msingi routing mbinu na sera routing ni muhimu sana kwa ajili ya ISP routing trafiki kati ya kila mmoja kwa ASs tofauti. BGP ni classless routing itifaki na inasaidia VLSM na muhtasari (njia mkusanyiko). Wakati IGRPs inaweza kupanua kwa maelfu ya njia, BGP inaweza kupanua kwa mamia ya maelfu ya njia, na kuifanya kuwa itifaki ya njia inayoweza kupanuliwa zaidi iliyowahi kutengenezwa. Kwa sasa, meza ya njia ya BGP ya kimataifa ina zaidi ya njia 300,000 za njia. Sifa nyingine ya BGP ni kiwango chake cha juu cha utulivu, kama hakuna convergence imara ya Internet routing meza (yaani, kitu ni daima kubadilisha katika meza kubwa kama hiyo routing). Kwa kuongezea, ni imara vya kutosha kushughulikia routing na maamuzi ya wakati huo huo. Kwa sababu BGP inazingatia utekelezaji wa sera, haitumii thamani rahisi ya kipimo ambayo inaweza kushikamana na parameter moja (kama bandwidth). Badala yake, BGP ina kundi la sifa ambayo inaweza kuwa manipulated kuamuru sera maalum routing. Wakati kutumika kubadilishana habari routing kati ya mashirika, BGP inaweza kuwa umeboreshwa katika matukio mawili maalum (tazama Picha 15 chini): - Transit mitandao: ISPs kwamba wanataka kutoa usafiri kwa maeneo mengine juu ya umma Internet. - Multi-homed mitandao: Big Enterprise Mitandao ambayo kutegemea sana juu ya trafiki ya Internet na kuwa na mahitaji ya kiufundi ya muunganisho kwa ISPs mbili au zaidi. BGP inaruhusu wao kudhibiti inbound na outbound routing sera. Mfano wa 15 <unk> BGP Deployment Scenarios Wengi wa Enterprise Mitandao hawana haja BGP na hii ni kwa sababu mbalimbali: <unk> Mtandao inahitaji moja ISP uhusiano na default routing Configuration ni ya kutosha. Njia ya default itaelekeza kwa ISP hivyo trafiki yote ya mtandao inaelekezwa kwa ISP hiyo moja. - kumbukumbu na rasilimali CPU ni mdogo na si kusaidia utekelezaji BGP. Kwa mfano, meza ya routing ya kimataifa inahitaji zaidi ya 1 GB ya kumbukumbu kwa ajili ya kuhifadhi. - Kutokuwa na nafasi ya anwani ya IPv4 inayotumiwa. Hii hutokea katika hali ambapo anwani za shirika zinamilikiwa na ISP, ambayo ni tukio la mara kwa mara kwa mashirika madogo na ya kati. Kama ilivyo kwa OSPF, BGP, na EIGRP, BGP hutumia muundo wa data wa meza tatu: Meza ya jirani: Ina habari kuhusu ujirani na wenzao. - BGP meza (topolojia meza): Ina wote wa prefixes kujifunza kutoka wenzao. IP Routing Table: IP Routing Table ni orodha ya njia za IP zinazotumiwa na IP. Vifaa vinavyoendesha BGP vinaweza kuanzisha adjacencies kujenga meza ya jirani na kisha kubadilishana updates kujenga meza ya BGP. Baada ya BGP meza ni kujengwa, njia bora kwa ajili ya routing habari ni kuchaguliwa na ni kutumika kujenga IP routing meza. BGP inawezesha aina tofauti za peering kuundwa: - BGP nje (eBGP) peering: BGP peering na jirani ambayo ni nje ya AS. - Ndani BGP (iBGP) peering: BGP peering na vifaa ndani ya AS. Picha 16 - BGP Peering Aina: Picha 16 juu inaonyesha mfano wa aina BGP Peering. BGP peering aina njia ni kutumwa na kupokea kutoka itakuwa ushawishi wa update na njia ya uteuzi sheria. Mfano wa hii ni kwamba eBGP wenzao ni kudhaniwa kuwa moja kwa moja kushikamana. Kama wao si, amri maalum aitwaye <unk>ebgp multihop<unk> lazima kuingia kuruhusu vifaa kujua wao si moja kwa moja kushikamana na kuanzisha BGP peering. Dhana hii haina sawa wakati wa kuzingatia iBGP peering, ambapo hakuna mahitaji ya uhusiano wa moja kwa moja. Mfano mwingine kuhusu iBGP dhidi ya tabia ya eBGP ni kwamba njia ya eBGP-iliyojifunza haitatangazwa kati ya wenzao wa iBGP kwa sababu ya utaratibu maalum wa kuzuia kitanzi ambacho kinazuia sasisho lililojifunza kupitia iBGP kutumwa kwa wenzao wengine wa iBGP. Hii ni kwa sababu BGP inachukua kwamba routers zote ndani ya AS zina habari kamili kuhusu kila mmoja. Kuna suluhisho nyingi za kutatua tatizo hili, ikiwa ni pamoja na: - Configure a full mesh of iBGP peers - Use BGP Route Reflectors - Organize the AS into BGP Confederations - The solution that involves a full mesh of iBGP peers is the least preferred because of the increased number of connections. Idadi ya jumla ya uhusiano ni n = n = n = 2 ambapo n = idadi ya routers BGP, hivyo kwa routers 1,000 kutakuwa na wenzao 499,500. Hii ni vigumu sana kutekeleza na kudumisha, hivyo Njia Reflector na Confederations ufumbuzi ni ilipendekeza badala yake. Maelezo kuhusu BGP Route Reflectors na BGP Confederations itakuwa kufunikwa baadaye katika sura hii. BGP inaweza kutumia sifa nyingi kuelezea sera ya routing na muhimu zaidi ni kama ifuatavyo: Next Hop: sifa hii lazima iwepo katika kila update ya BGP; inaonyesha ambapo trafiki inapaswa kutumwa kufikia marudio maalum. - AS-njia: sifa hii orodha ya mifumo yote ya uhuru kupitia ambayo kiambishi imepita. AS-njia ni sawa na hop kuhesabu, ila inatumia AS namba na hutoa maelezo zaidi kuhusu njia. - Asili: sifa hii hutoa habari kuhusu jinsi kiambishi aliingia mfumo wa BGP, ama moja kwa moja kutangazwa katika BGP na <unk>mtandao<unk> amri au redistributed kutoka itifaki nyingine routing. - Mapendeleo ya ndani: sifa hii huathiri njia trafiki inaingia AS na njia ambayo inachukua; inaweza pia kuathiri njia pakiti kuondoka AS na njia ambayo wao kuchukua. - Jumuiya: sifa hii makundi ya malengo katika jamii fulani na inatumika maamuzi ya routing kulingana na jamii hizo. Multi-Exist Discriminator (MED) - Mtazamo huu unaathiri jinsi trafiki inavyoingia AS na njia inayotumia. - Atomic jumla: sifa hii ni kutumika wakati wa kufanya BGP muhtasari. - Aggregator: sifa hii ni kutumika wakati wa kufanya BGP muhtasari. Sifa BGP inaweza kuwa makundi katika makundi kadhaa, kama vile maalumu na hiari. sifa inayojulikana ni mkono na wauzaji wote BGP na sifa hiari ni mkono tu na wauzaji fulani BGP. BGP sifa pia inaweza kuwa lazima na hiari. sifa lazima ni kutumwa katika kila routing update, wakati sifa discretionary inaweza au haiwezi kuwapo katika routing updates. Jamii nyingine hutegemea sifa ya njia ya transitivity, ambayo inaweza kuwa ama transitive (wanapita kati ya eBGP na iBGP majirani) au non-transitive (wanapita kati ya iBGP majirani tu). BGP ni pamoja na: - Well-kujulikana lazima (next-hop, AS-njia, asili) - Well-kujulikana hiari (mahali upendeleo, atomic jumla) - hiari transitive (aggregator, jamii) - hiari non-transitive (MED) BGP mifumo kuchambua sifa hizi zote na kuamua njia bora ya kupata marudio kulingana na mchakato huu tata sana uamuzi. Njia bora tu ni kutumwa kwa meza routing na wenzao. Kujua kama hop ijayo ni kupatikana lazima kuamua kwanza. Kama si, prefixes si kuwa na njia bora inapatikana, lakini kama ni, mchakato wa uamuzi kuchambua mambo yafuatayo: - Uzito (Cisco-maalum sifa) <unk> uzito wa juu ni preferred. - Mapendeleo ya ndani <unk> upendeleo wa ndani wa juu zaidi ni bora. - Njia za asili ya ndani <unk> hizi ni preferred. - AS-njia <unk> fupi AS-njia ni preferred. - Asili <unk> njia na aina ya chini ya asili ni preferred. - MED <unk> chini MED ni preferred. - Jirani aina <unk> njia kwamba alikuja kupitia eBGP juu ya wale ambao walikuwa kujifunza kupitia iBGP ni preferred. - IGP kipimo <unk> kama bado kuna sare, chini IGP kipimo inashinda. - Kama njia nyingi zipo katika meza routing, njia ambayo ilipokelewa kwanza ni preferred. - Njia ambayo inakuja kutoka BGP router na chini ya router ID ni preferred. - Njia na cluster orodha ya chini urefu ni preferred. - Njia ambayo inakuja kutoka kwa anwani ya jirani ya chini zaidi ni bora. BGP kwa kawaida ina viungo vya multi-homed kwa ISPs na hupatikana katika matukio ya MPLS VPN. Wakati wa kutumia BGP kama itifaki ya ndani ya routing, mesh kamili ya routers iBGP ni muhimu kwa sababu wao si re-advertise njia kwamba walikuwa kujifunza kutoka iBGP wenzao wengine, kulingana na tabia BGP. Mbinu mbili kwa ajili ya scaling iBGP na kuepuka haja ya full-mesh topology ni kutumia Njia Reflectors na Confederations. BGP Reflectors: Njia Reflectors (RRs) ni nodes kwamba kuonyesha iBGP updates kwa vifaa kwamba ni umeboreshwa kama wateja RR. Suluhisho hili ni rahisi kubuni na kutekeleza na kutatua iBGP kugawanywa upeo wa macho sheria. "Kutakuwa na ""mash"" kamili kati ya nodes RR na nodes kawaida (non-RR wateja), lakini uhusiano wa full-mesh kati ya RR na wateja wake si required." BGP RRs, iliyofafanuliwa katika RF 2796, ni wasemaji wa iBGP ambao huonyesha njia ambazo zilijifunza kutoka kwa wenzao wa iBGP kwa wateja wa RR. Wao pia kutafakari njia kupokea kutoka RR wateja kwa iBGP wengine wenzao (wasio RR wateja). Njia reflector mteja usanidi ni kufanyika tu juu ya kifaa RR, kwa kutumia <unk> jirani <unk> ip_address <unk> njia-reflector-mteja<unk> amri. Utaratibu huu wa usanidi unaweza kufanyika incremental kama RRs zaidi au RR wateja ni aliongeza. RR mteja mara nyingi kuanzisha peer vikao tu na vifaa RR. Picha 18: BGP Njia Reflector Redundancy Mara nyingi, redundant RRs zinahitajika ili kuepuka hatua moja ya kushindwa. RR na wateja wake wanaohusishwa huunda kundi la RR, kama inavyoonyeshwa katika Picha 18 hapo juu. Katika hali fulani kunaweza kuwa na overlap katika makundi RR lakini hii inaongeza kwa utata wa kubuni. RR kazi inaheshimu sheria zifuatazo wakati kueneza updates: - Wakati RR anapokea njia kutoka eBGP peer, ni anatuma njia kwa wateja wote na wasio wateja. RR inapo kupokea njia kutoka kwa mteja wa RR, inaonyesha njia kwa wateja wote wa RR na wasio wateja, na pia kwa wenzao wote wa eBGP. - Wakati RR anapokea njia kutoka non-client, ni kutafakari njia kwa wateja wote RR na anatuma njia kwa wenzake wote eBGP. BGP scalability ni njia ya pili ya kutumia BGP Confederations, kama ilivyoelezwa katika RFC 3065. Hii ina maana ya kuingiza habari katika njia BGP kutumia AS-njia sifa ya kuzuia loops katika AS. Mbinu hii inafanya kazi kwa kugawanya kawaida BGP AS katika sub-ASs nyingi. "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""Serikali ya nje"" ni ""Serikali ya nje"" (Serikali ya nje) na ""Serikali ya nje"" ni ""Serikali ya nje"" (Serikali ya nje)." BGP ni mfumo wa kuunganisha VLAN na kugawanya VLANs binafsi. BGP Confederations ni ngumu zaidi kuliko Njia Reflectors na wao kazi kwa kujenga sub-ASs ndani ya AS kuu. Mawasiliano kati ya sub-ASs tabia kama eBGP peer vikao na uhusiano ndani ya sub-ASs ni safi iBGP peer vikao. Hii inamaanisha kuwa tu full-mesh Configuration inahitajika ndani ya ASs, ambapo RRs pia inaweza kuwa Configured, hivyo mchanganyiko wa BGP teknolojia ya kubuni inapatikana. "Kama ilivyoelezwa katika picha ya 19 ya juu, ""Confederation AS 100"" imewekwa, na ndani ya AS ya Confederation hii, AS tatu za chini (Confederation Internal Peers) zimewekwa: 65001, 65002 na 65003." Kuunganisha kati ya vifaa katika sehemu moja ya AS ni BGP Confederation ndani wenzao na uhusiano kati ya vifaa katika maeneo tofauti ya AS ni BGP Confederation nje wenzao, na wana mengi ya kufanana na eBGP uhusiano. Kwa kuwa habari ya iBGP inabadilishwa ndani ya Confederation AS, nambari za AS-AS zinawekwa katika mfululizo wa Confederation, ambayo inafanya kazi sawa na sifa ya AS-path kama utaratibu wa kuzuia kitanzi. Njia ya matangazo ya sheria ni sawa na RR usambazaji sheria: - Njia ambayo ni kujifunza kutoka eBGP peer ni kutangazwa kwa wote Confederation nje na ndani ya wenzao. - Njia ambayo ni kujifunza kutoka Confederation ndani peer ni kutangazwa kwa wote Confederation nje na eBGP wenzao. - Njia ambayo ni kujifunza kutoka Confederation peer nje ni kutangazwa kwa wote Confederation ndani na eBGP wenzao. Nambari za AS za kibinafsi hutumiwa ndani ya AS ya Confederation na kisha huondolewa kutoka kwa sasisho zilizotumwa kutoka kwa Confederation. Hii inafanya BGP zaidi scalable na inaruhusu idadi ya uhusiano kuwa kupunguzwa. Nambari za AS ni nambari za 16 bit, na zinaanzia 0 hadi 655. Sub-ASs ni kawaida kupewa binafsi AS namba, kuanzia 64512 hadi 65535. Kwa sababu ya uchovu wa idadi ya umma ya AS, IANA ilianzisha nambari za AS za 32-bit na kuanza kuzigawa katika miaka michache iliyopita. Routers Cisco si njia IPv6 kwa default na uwezo huu lazima kuwa kuanzishwa na <unk>ipv6 unicast-routing<unk> amri. Routers Cisco ni dual-stack uwezo kwa default, maana wao ni uwezo wa kuendesha IPv4 na IPv6 wakati huo huo juu ya interfaces sawa. IPv6 ina uwezo wa kuwezesha routing ya static na inasaidia itifaki maalum za routing za nguvu ambazo ni tofauti za itifaki za routing za IPv4 zilizobadilishwa au kubuniwa upya ili kusaidia IPv6, kama vile zifuatazo: IPv6 (RIP) (RIP ya kizazi kipya) (Kumbuka: IPv6 na IPv6 zilipitia kiwango cha chini cha marekebisho ili kusaidia IPv6) kwa sababu zilijengwa kwa kuzingatia upanuzi. RIPng, OSPFv3 na EIGRPv6 ni itifaki mpya za routing ambazo zinafanya kazi kwa kujitegemea kutoka kwa toleo la IPv4 na zinaendesha katika mchakato tofauti kabisa kwenye kifaa. BGP na ISPS ni tofauti na sheria hii, kwani zinaelekeza trafiki ya IPv6 kwa kutumia mchakato sawa na trafiki ya IPv4, lakini hutumia dhana ya familia za anwani ambazo zina muundo mzima wa IPv6. Kwa sababu ya matatizo mengi ya IPv4 (kwa mfano, azimio la jina na mazingira ya NBMA) bado zipo na IPv6 routing. IPv6 ni protocol ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano ya mawasiliano. Katika meza ya routing ya router IPv6, hops ijayo ni anwani ya kiungo-mahali ya majirani. Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, njia ya static ni moja ya chaguzi ambazo zinaweza kutumika katika IPv6 na ina athari sawa na IPv4. Njia inaweza kuelekeza kwa: - Hop ijayo (hop ijayo lazima kutatuliwa) - Interface multipoint (mwisho wa malengo lazima kutatuliwa) - Point-to-point interface (hakuna azimio inahitajika) - RIPng, pia aitwaye RIP kwa IPv6, ilielezwa katika RFC 2080 na ni sawa katika operesheni kwa RIPv1 na RIPv2. RIPv2 hutumia anwani ya multicast 126.96.36.19 ili kubadilishana habari za njia na jirani zake, RIPng hutumia anwani ya FF02: 9 na bandari ya UDP 521. Tofauti nyingine kati ya toleo la IPv6 na RIPv2 ni kwamba IPv6 imewekwa katika kiwango cha interface, wakati RIPv1 na RIPv2 ni katika kiwango cha global routing configuration. OSPFv3 ni sawa na RFC 2740 na ni sawa na OSPFv2 (kwa IPv4). "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, IPv4 ni moja ya mifumo ya mtandao ya IPv6 inayojulikana kama ""multi-point non-broadcast"" (P2M) na inaendeshwa kwa njia ya IPv4 na inaendeshwa kwa kutumia IP protocol 88 (IP88), ambayo inasaidia upgrades za multicast kwa IPv4." "Kumbuka: kipengele muhimu cha kuzingatia wakati wa kutekeleza EIGRP v6 ni kwamba, tofauti na IPv4 EIGRP, mchakato ni kufungwa mpaka ni manually kuwezeshwa kwa kutoa ""hakuna shutdown"" amri chini ya mchakato wa routing." BGP kwa IPv6 ni umeboreshwa katika hali ya muundo wa familia ya anwani lakini inategemea kanuni sawa za muundo zinazotumiwa na IPv4 BGP. Kuna utaratibu wa kuzuia mzunguko wa iBGP ambao unazuia njia zilizofundishwa na iBGP kutangazwa kwa majirani wengine wa iBGP (hii inaweza kutatuliwa kwa kutumia Route Reflectors au Confederations). Kuna utaratibu wa kuzuia mzunguko wa eBGP ambao haukubali njia zinazoingia AS ambayo ina AS sawa katika njia. - Inatumia mchakato huo wa kuchagua njia bora. Wakati wa kubuni biashara routing, usanifu wa mtandao lazima kwanza kufikiri kama wanapaswa kutumia static au dynamic routing. Static routing ina maana manually kufafanua njia juu ya vifaa na dynamic routing ina maana kutumia kujitolea routing itifaki ambayo kujenga meza routing. Dynamic routing itifaki mara nyingi kutumika katika mitandao ya kisasa ni EIGRP, OSPF, na BGP. Mitandao mikubwa, ikiwa ni pamoja na Internet, ni msingi juu ya mfumo wa kujitegemea (AS) dhana. AS ni kundi la vifaa vya mtandao chini ya utawala wa kawaida, na mara nyingi hii hufafanua shirika kubwa au ISP. Routing itifaki inaweza kuwa classified kulingana na vigezo tofauti. Kulingana na eneo ambalo wanafanya kazi, wanaweza kuwa ndani (inter-AS) itifaki za routing au nje (intra-AS) itifaki za routing. Protokolli za routing za ndani zinaweza kugawanywa zaidi kama itifaki za routing za vector ya umbali au itifaki za routing za hali ya kiungo, kulingana na tabia yao kuhusu mchakato wa kubadilishana wa sasisho la router. Uwezo wa njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia ya njia. Link-hali routing itifaki ni pamoja na OSPF, IS-IS, na OSPFv3. Tofauti kuu kati ya umbali vector routing itifaki na kiungo-hali routing itifaki ni njia ya kubadilishana routing updates. Uwezo wa distance vector routing protocols kutumia "routing kwa uvumi" mbinu, kama kila router hutegemea majirani zake kudumisha sahihi routing habari. Hii ina maana meza nzima routing ni kutumwa mara kwa mara kwa majirani. Link-hali routing itifaki si kwa ujumla <unk> njia kwa uvumi <unk> kama umbali vector routing itifaki kufanya. Vifaa vya routing kubadilishana habari kati yao kuhusu wao kiungo-hali. Vifaa kujenga ramani ya mtandao kujitegemea na loop-free kulingana na link-hali ya habari kila router inazalisha na kueneza kwa routers nyingine. Link-hali routing itifaki kutoa mfululizo wa faida muhimu ikilinganishwa na umbali vector routing itifaki. Faida muhimu zaidi inahusiana na sababu ya kukaribia. Mipango ya kuunganisha ya hali ya kiungo lazima iunganishe haraka zaidi kwa sababu mara tu topolojia ya mtandao inabadilika, habari maalum tu hutumwa kwa routers katika eneo fulani. Mipango ya routing ya nje huendeshwa kati ya AS (inter-AS) na mfano wa kawaida ni BGPv4. Sababu kuu ya aina tofauti za itifaki za njia zinatumiwa kubeba njia nje ya mipaka ya AS ni haja ya kubadilishana kiasi kikubwa cha viingilio vya njia. Routers kutumia Administrative Distance (AD) kuchagua njia bora wakati itifaki nyingi routing kutangaza kiambishi sawa. AD thamani inawakilisha jinsi ya kuaminika maalum routing itifaki ni. Njia muhtasari husaidia kufanya kubuni routing zaidi scalable, bila kujali itifaki routing kutumika (kwa mfano, RIPv2, EIGRP, au OSPF). Pia husaidia kuweka anwani za mtandao katika vitalu vinavyoweza kutumika (vilivyoorodheshwa hapa chini), ambavyo vinaweza kutumika kwa madhumuni mengi: - Vipande vya NAT - Vipande vinavyotumiwa katika usambazaji - Vipande vya usimamizi wa VLANs - Vipande vya huduma za maudhui Aina maalum ya muhtasari wa njia inaweza kutekelezwa kwa njia ya njia ya default. Kila mtandao wa kisasa kwa kawaida hutumia aina fulani ya routing default. Njia bora ni kuendeleza njia ya default ya 0.0.0.0 kutoka kwa mtandao wa biashara kwa ISP, badala ya kufanya muundo wa njia ya kimya kwenye kila router katika shirika. Njia ya kuchuja inaruhusu udhibiti wa mtiririko wa trafiki ya mtandao na kuzuia trafiki ya usafiri isiyotakiwa, hasa katika hali ambazo zina redundancy au njia nyingi. Njia ya kuchuja inalinda dhidi ya updates makosa routing na kuna mbinu kadhaa ambayo inaweza kutumika katika suala hili. Kwa mfano, na OSPF, kama Core Layer uhusiano ni kupotea, trafiki haipaswi kuwa redirected kupitia tovuti ya mbali. Kuna njia mbili za kuhamia kati ya itifaki za routing: kutumia AD, kutekeleza usambazaji upya kwa kuhamisha routers ya mpaka katika hatua ndogo, na EIGRP (Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol) ni itifaki ya kipekee kwa sababu inatumia mbinu ya mseto wa umbali na sifa za hali ya kiungo. Kuchanganya sifa hizi hufanya EIGRP imara sana na inaruhusu mkusanyiko wa haraka, hata katika topolojia kubwa. EIGRP ni moja ya programu za msingi za Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu wa Utaratibu. Wakati kuchambua scalability juu ya router, kuna maeneo matatu rasilimali ambayo inapaswa kuchukuliwa katika kuzingatia: kumbukumbu, CPU, na interface bandwidth. Njia bora za kupunguza maswali ya EIGRP na kufikia muundo wa EIGRP unaoweza kupanuliwa ni kama ifuatavyo: - Kutumia muundo thabiti wa muhtasari - Kutumia orodha za usambazaji - Kutumia maeneo ya stub - Kuhakikisha kuna wafuasi wanaofaa - Utekelezaji wa njia sawa - Kuepuka kiwango cha EIGRP nyingi, ikiwa inawezekana, Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) ni moja ya itifaki ngumu zaidi za njia zinazoweza kutumiwa katika mitandao ya kisasa. OSPF ni wazi-kiwango itifaki, wakati EIGRP si. OSPF inafanya kazi kwa kutumia algorithm ya Dijkstra SPF na kwa kubadilishana matangazo ya Link-State (LSAs) kati ya majirani. LSA ni aina ya 2 (Router LSA, Type 2 LSA, Network LSA, Type 3 LSA, Type 4 LSA, Type 5 LSA, Type 6 LSA, Type 7 LSA, Type 9 LSA, Type 10 LSA) na aina ya LSA ya nje (Type 8, 9, na 10 LSA). Aina tofauti za eneo ni kama ifuatavyo: eneo la kawaida, eneo la stub, eneo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub, eneo lisilo la stub. Metric yake inategemea sifa nyingi ambazo zinaweza kurekebishwa na kudhibitiwa kuamua ni njia gani data ya AS itachukua. BGP inaweza kutumika katika mitandao ya usafiri (ISPs ambayo wanataka kutoa usafiri kwa maeneo mengine kwenye mtandao wa umma) au katika mitandao ya multi-homed ( mashirika makubwa ambayo kuunganisha kwa ISPs nyingi). Wakati wa kutumia BGP kama itifaki ya ndani ya routing, mesh kamili ya routers iBGP ni muhimu kwa sababu wao si re-advertise njia kwamba walikuwa kujifunza kutoka iBGP wenzao wengine, kulingana na tabia ya itifaki BGP. Njia mbili za kupanua iBGP na kuepuka haja ya topolojia ya full-mesh ni kama ifuatavyo: IPv6 inaruhusu matumizi ya routing static na pia inasaidia itifaki maalum za routing dynamic ambazo ni tofauti za itifaki za routing IPv4 zilizobadilishwa au kubuni upya ili kusaidia IPv6: