subscribe to our feed.
As I had mentioned earlier, there were projects from every division of the College of Applied Sciences down at yesterday’s tech expo; offering some truly different proposals and products. One of these projects was headed by an IT major, Randy Patrick, who was there to show us some of the advantages of using a specific routing protocol (EIGRP) to manage the links on an enterprise-size LAN. Of course, the project head was absolutely correct in his study, but I must explain EIGRP a little bit first…
EIGRP (Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol) is basically a method of communication. A method of communication between routers; specifically Cisco routers. EIGRP, created by Cisco, is a method of transferring information about a network to other routers by way of link-state advertisements and routing distance calculations. This method of sharing is what I refer to as “passive” advertisement: typically, a table containing such things as distance and the status of the connecting link is formed when a device is added or removed from a network. This usually occurs as the network is coming online for the first time.
In comparison, Patrick used the older but easier to use RIP (Routing Information Protocol) to demonstrate how most networks operate. The primary reason that RIP is used more often is that it’s much easier to use, doesn’t require a robustly-equipped router, and RIP v2 supports VLSM and other features, making it an easy and attractive protocol. However, RIP’s major downfall is that, in order to maintain the accuracy of it’s routing information, it must periodically send out update requests to all areas of a broadcast domain; every 30 seconds is the default, but that can be changed. This action can cause a significant drop in available bandwidth and creates bottlenecks and, occasionally, loss of connectivity in saturated networks. This fact is made even more apparent with today’s technology, which is intensive on maintaining connectivity for tasks such as streaming video or audio, Voice-Over-IP, and large upload and download events.
While going with EIGRP may lock you into utilizing Cisco hardware, Patrick illustrated a number of advantages of this methodology:
Mr. Patrick handled himself well, as I was right behind the judges as they were asking him questions. Unknown to him, I had a few tough questions of my own about it’s feasibility. “How would existing hardware need to be modified to completely accommodate EIGRP into it’s structure?” In order to run EIGRP, more router processes need to happen internally, meaning existing hardware may be inadequate to run EIGRP effectively. This was one of my hard questions; as this protocol would make total sense to use in small- to medium-sized businesses that need all the uptime they can get, but the cost prohibitions of more expensive hardware could scare away potential customers (and beneficiaries). I waited until the judges left to ask that question; but he was a real trooper about it, answering that hardware tailored to RIP would probably need an overhaul to handle EIGRP. However, EIGRP, with it’s benefits to business uptime and its quick response to failures, is still clearly the better choice, and Mr. Patrick did an excellent job illustrating that.
Now, tomorrow, I bring you a new way to gather your news: News.Net…
Pictures courtesy of: Cisco Systems, Aaron Klinefelter;
If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.
Recent Comments