Options
one numb quesiton about RIP
johnifanx98
Member Posts: 329
in CCNA & CCENT
why the update timer is set by default to be 30 seconds? Is it a good idea to reduce it to 10 seconds to fasten convergence?
If not, what is the concern? The traffic volumn or sensitivity to flapping routers?
If not, what is the concern? The traffic volumn or sensitivity to flapping routers?
Comments
-
Options
TurK-FX
Member Posts: 174
Well, it would speed up the convergence process. But there will 3 times more broadcast on Routers which means 3 times more bandwidth will be used. Routers are already busy routing the traffic to appropriate directions. It would be extra work on them.WGU classes: Transferred -> AGC1, CLC1, TBP1, CJC1, BVC1, C278, CRV1, IWC1, IWT1, C246, C247, C132, C164, INC1, C277. Appealed -> WFV1 and C393.
What is Left to take - > EUP1, EUC1, C220, C221, BNC1, GC1, C299, CTV1, DJV1, DHV1, CUV1, CJV1, TPV1, C394
Currently Studying -> CCNA security (Designing Customized Security & Security) -
Options
SteveO86
Member Posts: 1,423
The default timers on any routing protocol can be tweaked for better convergence time. Which is always a good idea as long as it reasonable and the timer is not too aggressive which can cause issues.
RIP sends the entire routing table even when there have not been any changes, which is not very efficient. Even if your update timer is now 10 seconds, that means if a route goes down you can essentially have a 10 second outage before the routing tables re-converge which in the networking work is a very loooooong time.
RIPv2 and RIPng offer triggered updates, however it still send the entire routing table.My Networking blog
Latest blog post: Let's review EIGRP Named Mode
Currently Studying: CCNP: Wireless - IUWMS -
Optionsrscrt
Member Posts: 62 ■■□□□□□□□□
Traffic overhead is the concern (broadcating of the entire routing table, as mentioned above). I would recommend using different protocol for faster convergence..