home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!indyvax.iupui.edu!imhw400
- From: imhw400@indyvax.iupui.edu
- Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
- Subject: Re: What are the Pros/Cons of Multi-protocol routing?
- Message-ID: <1992Aug21.091412.158@indyvax.iupui.edu>
- Date: 21 Aug 92 09:14:12 -0500
- References: <86673@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Followup-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
- Distribution: usa
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <86673@netnews.upenn.edu>, tony@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Anthony Olejnik) writes:
- [...]
- > What are some of the advantages/disadvantages of keeping the
- > backbone pure (with only IP)?
-
- [Sound of donning NOMEX suit]
-
- Advantages: none that I've ever heard of.
-
- Disadvantages: o Other protocols slow down (maybe not a lot) due to
- encapsulation overhead.
-
- o Greater complexity (=greater opportunity for error),
- in both software and administration.
-
- Bottom line: you pay little but get nothing. What a deal.
-
- > What are the advantages/disadvantages of tunnelling the other
- > protocols (AppleTalk/IPX/DecNet) within IP?
-
- Same as above. This is really the same question, given that demand for these
- other stacks exists.
-
- }flame on{ Maintaining the ethnic purity of our backbones is a goal that
- nobody has ever justified to my satisfaction. What does it help? Isn't it
- just a holdover from the early days of multiprotocol routers, when they did IP
- passably and others poorly? Those days are gone.
- --
- Mark H. Wood, Lead Analyst/Programmer +1 317 274 0749 [@disclaimer@]
- Internet: IMHW400@INDYVAX.IUPUI.EDU BITNET: IMHW400@INDYVAX
- Celebrate freedom: read a banned newsgroup.
-