Re: Routing problems..

Dick St.Peters (stpeters@NetHeaven.com)
Thu, 29 May 1997 12:04:28 -0400

Adam Wills (Global 2000) writes:
> To put it another way, the Livingston pm's seem to be 'sharing' the subnet
> mask's via RIPv1 (which it shouldn't know how to do) yet the same RIP
> broadcasts on the same ether interface does not include the subnet masks
> to the cisco router. It seems like Livingston is running RIPv1Enhanced
> and only the livingston's speak it :)

Yep. Livingston added a couple of hacks to mollify us and let their
gear be wedged into a real routing environment while they struggled
with ospf. There are two descriptions of this: "meeting customer
needs" and "proprietary solutions".

Personally, I think the Livingston guys should remember their long
wander in the proprietary wilderness when commenting on other vendors'
approaches to meeting customer needs. Glass houses and all that ...

> I miss ospf :)

I'd sure miss it too ... I missed it for two years. Turning off RIP,
clearing the netmask table, deleting all my static routes ... this is
routing the way routing must've been meant to be :)

OSPF was a long time in coming, but in typical Livingston style now
that it's here it works like a charm.

--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters@NetHeaven.com 
Gatekeeper, NetHeaven, Ballston Spa, NY, 1-800-910-6671 (voice)
Albany/Saratoga/Glens Falls/North Creek/Lake Placid/Blue Mountain Lake
	  First Internet service based in the 518 area code