Flooding in large networks with
relatively small links, such as low-bandwidth links, is much more noticeable than a similar
exercise on a small network with large links, such as T3s and Ethernet.
?– Link-state routing is both memory- and processor-intensive. Consequently, more fully
con?¬?gured routers are required to support link-state routing than distance vector routing. This
increases the cost of the routers that are con?¬?gured for link-state routing.
The following are some of the bene?¬?ts of a link-state routing protocol:
?– Troubleshooting is usually easier in link-state networks because every router has a complete
copy of the network topology, or at least of its own area of the network. However, interpreting
the information stored in the topology, neighbor databases, and routing table requires an
understanding of the concepts of link-state routing.
?– Link-state protocols usually scale to larger networks than distance vector protocols,
particularly the traditional distance vector protocols such as RIPv1 and IGRP.
You can address and resolve the potential performance impacts of both drawbacks through
foresight, planning, and engineering.
Pages:
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201