Dynamic Routing

Scalable Infrastructure
Workshop, AfNOG2008
Static and Dynamic Routing
 Static Routing is a simplistic approach
 Shortcomings
 Cumbersome to configure
 Cannot adapt to addition of new links or nodes
 Cannot adapt to link or node failures
 Cannot easily handle multiple paths to a
destination
 Does not scale to large networks
 Solution is to use Dynamic Routing
Desirable Characteristics of Dynamic
Routing
 Automatically detect and adapt to
topology changes
 Provide optimal routing
 Scalability
 Robustness
 Simplicity
 Rapid convergence
 Some control of routing choices
 E.g. which links we prefer to use
Convergence – why do I care?
 Convergence is when all the routers have
the same routing information
 When a network is not converged there is
network downtime
 Packets don’t get to where they are supposed
to go
 Black holes (packets “disappear”)
 Routing Loops (packets go back and fore between the
same devices)
 Occurs when there is a change in status of
router or the links
Interior Gateway Protocols
 Four well known IGPs today
 RIP
 EIGRP
 ISIS
 OSPF
RIP
 Stands for “Routing Information Protocol”
 Some call it “Rest In Peace” 
 Lots of scaling problems
 RIPv1 is classfull, and officially obsolete
 RIPv2 is classless
 has improvements over RIPv1
 is not widely used in the Internet industry
 Only use is at the internet edge, between dial
aggregation devices which can only speak RIPv2 and
the next layer of the network
Why not use RIP?
 RIP is a Distance Vector Algorithm
 Listen to neighbouring routes
 Install all routes in routing table
 Lowest hop count wins
 Advertise all routes in table
 Very simple, very stupid
 Only metric is hop count
 Network is max 16 hops (not large enough)
 Slow convergence (routing loops)
 Poor robustness
EIGRP
 “Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol”
 Predecessor was IGRP which was classfull
 IGRP developed by Cisco in mid 1980s to overcome
scalability problems with RIP
 Cisco proprietary routing protocol
 Distance Vector Routing Protocol
 Has very good metric control
 Widely used in many enterprise networks and in
some ISP networks
 Multi-protocol (supports more than IP)
 Exhibits good scalability and rapid convergence
 Supports unequal cost load balancing
IS-IS
 “Intermediate System to Intermediate
System”
 Selected in 1987 by ANSI as OSI
intradomain routing protocol (CLNP –
connectionless network protocol)
 Based on work by DEC for DECnet/OSI
(DECnet Phase V)
 Extensions for IP developed in 1988
 NSFnet deployed its IGP based on early ISIS-
IP draft
IS-IS (cont)
 Adopted as ISO proposed standard in
1989
 Integrated ISIS supports IP and CLNP
 Debate between benefits of ISIS and OSPF
 Several ISPs chose ISIS over OSPF due to
superior Cisco implementation
 1994-date: deployed by several larger
ISPs
 Developments continuing in IETF in
parallel with OSPF
OSPF
 Open Shortest Path First
 “Open” means it is public domain
 Uses “Shortest Path First” algorithm – sometimes called
“the Dijkstra algorithm”
 IETF Working Group formed in 1988 to design an
IGP for IP
 OSPF v1 published in 1989 – RFC1131
 OSPF v2 published in 1991 – RFC1247
 Developments continued through the 90s and
today
 OSPFv3 based on OSPFv2 designed to support IPv6
Why use OSPF?
 Dynamic IGP, Link State Protocol
 IETF standard – RFC2328
 RFC1812 requires that a router with routing
protocols must implement OSPF
 Encourages good network design
 Areas naturally follow typical ISP network layouts
 Relatively easy to learn
 Has fast convergence
 Scales well
Link State Algorithm
 Each router contains a database
containing a map of the whole topology
 Links
 Their state (including cost)
 All routers have the same information
 All routers calculate the best path to every
destination
 Any link state changes are flooded across
the network
 “Global spread of local knowledge”
Routing versus Forwarding

 Routing = building
maps and giving
directions

 Forwarding = moving
packets between
interfaces according to
the “directions”
IP Routing – finding the path
 Path is derived from information received
from the routing protocol
 Several alternative paths may exist
 best next hop stored in forwarding table
 Decisions are updated periodically or as
topology changes (event driven)
 Decisions are based on:
 topology, policies and metrics (hop count,
filtering, delay, bandwidth, etc.)
IP Forwarding
 Router makes decision on which interface
a packet is sent to
 Forwarding table populated by routing
process
 Forwarding decisions:
 Destination address
 class of service (fair queuing, precedence,
others)
 local requirements (packet filtering)
Routing Tables Feed the Forwarding
Table
Forwarding Information Base (FIB)

Routing Information Base (RIB)

BGP 4 Routing Table

OSPF – Link State Database

Static Routes
Summary
 Now know:
 Difference between static routes, RIP and
OSPF
 Difference between Routing and Forwarding
 A Dynamic Routing Protocol should be used in
any ISP network
 Static routes don’t scale
 RIP doesn’t scale (and is obsolete)