Core Switches, EIGRP, Cisco 7200's and such....

[T3C]

Question. Can I run EIGRP in this setup:

Cisco 7200 --------=====Non=====-----Cisco 2600
Cisco 7200 --------====Cisco=====-----Cisco 2600
Cisco 7200 --------===Core Switch===----Cisco 2600

Basicly what we have is 3 Cisco 7200's going to a non cisco core switch. And off of that core switch I have multiple 2600's attached. The question is will the non Cisco core switch allow me to pass EIGRP?

I know the easy answer would be to get a Cisco core switch but that may not be an option. I guess the other option would be to run OSPF.

 

[spidey07]

If it's just switching at layer2 you're fine. If there's any routing going (layer3 boundary) on then you'll need OSPF/redistribution or tunnel through.

 

[T3C]

So then in theory I could vlan through the switch and then pass EIGRP?

 

[spidey07]

a vlan is just a layer2 network. Provided the router interfaces are in the same layer2 network you're fine. neighbors will form and you're good to go.

 

[cmetz]

T3C, don't run EIGRP if you can at all avoid it. Switch to OSPF.

 

[T3C]

Originally posted by: cmetz
T3C, don't run EIGRP if you can at all avoid it. Switch to OSPF.

Why is that?


-T3C

 

[cmetz]

EIGRP is a bad protocol at a protocol and theory level, is Cisco proprietary, and is pretty much defunct even in Cisco's opinion. It should not be used for new designs.

 

[Cooky]

Originally posted by: cmetz
EIGRP is a bad protocol at a protocol and theory level, is Cisco proprietary, and is pretty much defunct even in Cisco's opinion. It should not be used for new designs.

First I've heard it...this came from your source in Cisco?
We run EIGRP when we can, and OSPF when we must.

 

[jlazzaro]

Originally posted by: cmetz
EIGRP is a bad protocol at a protocol and theory level, is Cisco proprietary, and is pretty much defunct even in Cisco's opinion. It should not be used for new designs.

i think thats going a little far...neither EIGRP or OSPF is perfect. both have their uses, and in certain scenarios either one can stumble.

while im not about to turn this into an EIGRP vs OSPF debate, i think proper design should mitigate a lot of the problems commonly associated with it. i will note however we are running EIGRP in a large MPLS environment and so are many other government organizations. it couldnt possibly be THAT bad

 

[spidey07]

oooooh, I love a good eigrp vs. ospf fight. (and OSPF is my specialty)

FIGHT!

ospf = great scalability, awsome protocol run by some of the largest internal routing networks in the world. Suffers from set backs, mainly design, but protocol and flooding is it's downfall. It's power comes from treating routes/LSAs differently depending source. Address space design is crucial. Is OSPF superior to EIGRP? Depends on design.

eigrp = great and superior for fast convergence with minimal downtime, does not have the scalability/segmentation (IMHO) of OSPF. Nobody in their right mind is going to use a proprietary protocol for an internal routing protocol without proper classification, but what it does when bounded by another protocol is great.

Both have their problems, most all of these problems can be solved with good design.