mats@devildog.att.com (Matt Szela) (06/20/91)
Can somebody give me an update on the latest status of the IS-IS ISO protocol? Is it in a draft stage or is it becoming an ISO standard real soon now?? Are any of the router vendors implementing it yet? (i.e. cisco, wellfleet, etc). The reason I am posing this question is that I am getting involved with building networks that need to support both TCP/IP and ISO protocols and routing. I am being told that due to the deficiencies in the ISO routing protocols we need to keep the LANS and routers organized in a non-hierachical fashion if we want to run both protocols on the same networks. Does the implementation and acceptance if IS-IS protocols going to address this probem?? Or is there a problem?? Thanks in advance, Matt S. AT&T IMS
dougm@WARTHOG.NCSL.NIST.GOV (Doug Montgomery) (06/26/91)
>From: att!devildog!mats@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Matt Szela) >Organization: AT&T IMS - Piscataway, NJ (USA) >Subject: IS-IS ISO Protocols > >Can somebody give me an update on the latest status of the IS-IS ISO >protocol? Is it in a draft stage or is it becoming an ISO standard real >soon now?? The Intra-domain IS-IS routing protocol's DIS (DIS10589) ballot has closed. It is expected to go to final IS in July 1991. There are some implementors agreements for IS-IS in the OIW. Look for stable implementor agreements in December and for IS-IS to be mandated for use in US GOSIP Version 3. >Are any of the router vendors implementing it yet? (i.e. cisco, >wellfleet, etc). > Numerous router vendors are implementing the protocol. There is a public domain version for GATED from the University of Wisconsin. We at NIST have a project to do interoperability and conformance testing of emerging OSI routers. A description of this program can be be anonymous FTAM'ed or FTP'ed from osi3.ncsl.nist.gov as ./pub/doc/nist-routing-lab.ps If you can't get file transfer access just drop me a note and I will email it to you. >The reason I am posing this question is that I am getting involved >with building networks that need to support both TCP/IP and ISO >protocols and routing. I am being told that due to the deficiencies >in the ISO routing protocols we need to keep the LANS and routers >organized in a non-hierachical fashion if we want to run both >protocols on the same networks. I'm not sure what you mean by this. IS-IS has a two level routing hierarchy. But you could also arrange static OSI routing in a hierachical fashion. > >Does the implementation and acceptance if IS-IS protocols going >to address this probem?? Or is there a problem?? > I don't think there is a problem. Basicly you can run OSI and IP routing protocol on the same set of physical resources but with unrelated logical routing structures (how the resources are arranged into hiearchies, where routing [domain|autonomous system] boundaries are, etc.). An interesting twist on this subject is "Dual IS-IS" (see RFC 1195) which uses IS-IS to distribute both IP and CLNP routing information. In this use of IS-IS there are restrictions on the relationship between the OSI and IP routing structures. dougm +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Doug Montgomery dougm@osi.ncsl.nist.gov | | National Institute of Standards and Technology | | Technology Building, B-217 Voice: +1-301-975-3630 | | Gaithersburg, MD 20899 USA Fax: +1-301-590-0932 | +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+