Routing Protocols:
RIP V1—Routing Information Protocol
Origin: Based on RFC 1058
Type of protocol: Distance vector, based on the Bellman-Ford distance vector algorithm
Metric: Hop count
Methodology: Selects routers with the lowest hop count; updates other routers by broadcasting the
entire routing table to all routers every 30 seconds
Ideal topology: Smaller networks that aren’t very dynamic, have fewer than 15 hops, and are not
subnetted from classful boundaries (see Weaknesses)
Strengths:
Easy to configure and use
Since it has been around so long, it is well known and widely used.
Weaknesses:
Limited to a hop count of 15; after a packet travels through 15 routers and still has another router to travel to,
it will be discarded.
Doesn’t support a variable-length subnet mask (VLSM), which means that it sends routing updates based only
on a fixed-length subnet mask (FLSM) or routes that fall on classful boundaries. So RIP V1 will not work with
a network that has been subnetted beyond the normal /8, /16, /24 (255.0.0.0, 255.255.0.0, 255.255.255.0) or
Class A, B, and C network boundaries.
Converges slowly, especially on large networks
Doesn’t have knowledge of the bandwidth of a link
Doesn’t support multiple paths for the same route
Routing updates can require significant bandwidth, as the entire routing table is sent when a link’s status
changes
Liable to to routing loops
RIP V2—Routing Information Protocol
Origin: Based on RFC 1388
Type of protocol: Distance vector, based on the Bellman-Ford distance vector algorithm
Metric: Hop count
Methodology: Selects routers with the lowest hop count; updates other routers by multicasting the
entire routing table to all routers every 30 seconds
Ideal topology: Smaller networks that aren’t very dynamic, have fewer than 15 hops
Strengths:
Easy to configure and use
Since it has also been around so long, it is well known and widely used.
Version 2 adds support for VSLM or Classless Internet Domain Routing (CIDR), MD5 Authentication, and
route summarization.
Weaknesses:
Limited to a hop count of 15; after a packet travels through 15 routers and still has another router to travel to,
it will be discarded.
Converges slowly, especially on large networks
Doesn’t have knowledge of the bandwidth of a link
Doesn’t support multiple paths for the same route
Routing updates can require significant bandwidth as the entire routing table is sent when a link’s status
changes
Prone to routing loops
IGRP—Interior Gateway Routing Protocol
Origin: Based only on Cisco’s implementation, not an Internet RFC
Type of protocol: Distance vector, based on the Bellman-Ford distance vector algorithm
Metric: Delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load
Methodology: Sends hello packets every five seconds to neighbors to see if the neighbor is still
available; updates other routers by notifying them only when routes change
Ideal topology: Any network, small to very large; all routers must be from Cisco. Cannot subnet
network beyond classful boundaries.
Strengths:
Easy to configure and use
Uses the delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load of a link as its metric. This makes it very accurate in selecting
the proper route.
Weaknesses:
Not an Internet standard; all routers must be from Cisco Systems
Converges slowly; slower than RIP
Doesn’t support VLSM
Prone to routing loops
Definition
Convergence: The process that a routing protocol goes through to alert all routers on the network of
the next available path when the primary path becomes unavailable.
EIGRP—Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol
Origin: Based only on Cisco’s implementation, not an Internet RFC
Type of protocol: Hybrid distance vector
Metric: Delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load, using the Diffusing Update Algorithm (DUAL)
Methodology: Sends hello packets every five seconds to neighbors (can interoperate with IGRP) to
see if the neighbors are still available; updates other routers by notifying them only when routes
change
Ideal topology: Any network, small to very large; all routers must be Cisco
Strengths:
Uses DUAL to provide very quick convergence and a loop-free network
Supports IP and IPX
Requires less CPU than OSPF (see next section)
Requires little bandwidth for routing updates
Supports VLSM or CIDR
Uses the delay, bandwidth, reliability, and load of a link as its metric; this makes it very accurate in selecting
the proper route
Offers backward compatibility with IGRP
Weaknesses:
Not an Internet standard; all routers must be from Cisco Systems
OSPF V2—Open Shortest Path First
[Note that version 1 of OSPF was never implemented.]
Origin: Based on RFC 2328
Type of protocol: Link-state, runs the Dijkstra algorithm to calculate the shortest-path first (SPF)
tree
Metric: Calculates the cost to traverse router links to get to the destination, taking the bandwidth of
the links into account
Methodology: Develops adjacencies with its neighbors, periodically sending hello packets to
neighbors, flooding changes to neighbors when a link’s status changes, and sending “paranoia
updates” to neighbors every 30 minutes of all recent link state changes
Ideal topology: Any network, small to very large
Strengths:
Converges quickly, compared to a distance vector protocol
Routing update packets are small, as the entire routing table is not sent
Not prone to routing loops
Scales very well to large networks
Recognizes the bandwidth of a link, taking this into account in link selection
Supports VLSM or CIDR
Supports a long list of optional features that many of the other protocols do not
Weaknesses:
More complex to configure and understand than a distance vector protocol
Final word
Just to clarify this comparison, one way routing protocols are classified is according to how they are
used. Interior routing protocols are used within a single domain on your interior network. Also called
an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), this is the type of routing protocol you usually think of using for
your internal network. The protocols we looked at in this article are all IGPs. Note that I omitted a few
of the lesser-known interior routing protocols to keep the discussion reasonably short. These include
IS-IS, NLSP, RTMP, and IPX RIP.
Another type of routing protocol is an exterior routing protocol, or Exterior Gateway Protocol (EGP).
These protocols maintain routing information for networks that are external to your network. An EGP
doesn’t know how to deliver data within your network, just how to deliver data outside your network.
While a variety of IGPs are currently used, about the only EGP in use today is the Border Gateway
Protocol (BGP). This is the routing protocol of the Internet.
From talking with administrators who manage a variety of networks, the consensus is that OSPF is
becoming the most popular interior routing protocol today. I would recommend OSPF or EIGRP for
any new network, based on their popularity, flexibility, and fast convergence. Of course, the choice is
yours based on the requirements of your network
Compare OSPF EIGRP
point
standard Open standard of Cisco owned private routing
IETF，supported by most protocol，not been supported by any
vendors. other vendors；is not as mature as
OSPF.
popularity Most popular IGP in the world Only a few networks designed by
EIGRP，and is getting less and less
popular.
algorithm SPF algorithm fast DUAL algorithm could be in SIA
convergence, loop free. status, query could spread out the
whole network.
topology Can build a hierarchy and Can not build a hierarchy network with
scaleable network. this protocol.
Supportive of Support OSPF-TE Does not support TE
new
technology
RIP - How Works and Advantages - Disadvantages
OSPF - same as above
EBGP and IBGP
EIGRP -
Switching Protocols:
STP, RSTP, VTP
Wireless LAN :
WLC - Wireless LAN Controller
AP -
Security :- like WEP, WPA and WAP2
Various wireless security protocols were developed to protect home wireless networks. These
wireless security protocols include WEP, WPA, and WPA2, each with their own strengths —
and weaknesses. In addition to preventing uninvited guests from connecting to your wireless
network, wireless security protocols encrypt your private data as it is being transmitted over the
airwaves.
Wireless networks are inherently insecure. In the early days of wireless networking,
manufacturers tried to make it as easy as possible for end users. The out-of-the-box configuration
for most wireless networking equipment provided easy (but insecure) access to a wireless
network.
Although many of these issues have since been addressed, wireless networks are generally not as
secure as wired networks. Wired networks, at their most basic level, send data between two
points, A and B, which are connected by a network cable. Wireless networks, on the other hand,
broadcast data in every direction to every device that happens to be listening, within a limited
range.
Following are descriptions of the WEP, WPA, and WPA2 wireless security protocols:
Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP): The original encryption protocol developed for
wireless networks. As its name implies, WEP was designed to provide the same level of
security as wired networks. However, WEP has many well-known security flaws, is
difficult to configure, and is easily broken.
Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA): Introduced as an interim security enhancement over
WEP while the 802.11i wireless security standard was being developed. Most current
WPA implementations use a preshared key (PSK), commonly referred to as WPA
Personal, and the Temporal Key Integrity Protocol (TKIP, pronounced tee-kip) for
encryption. WPA Enterprise uses an authentication server to generate keys or certificates.
Wi-Fi Protected Access version 2 (WPA2): Based on the 802.11i wireless security
standard, which was finalized in 2004. The most significant enhancement to WPA2 over
WPA is the use of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for encryption. The security
provided by AES is sufficient (and approved) for use by the U.S. government to encrypt
information classified as top secret — it’s probably good enough to protect your secrets
as well!
Other Topics :
MPLS and Basic of Networking OSI Model.
Q :- What is cisco three - layered hierarchical model
For this refer : http://www.semsim.com/ccna/ccna-study-guide.asp?ain=57
Q :- If we want to connect 500 host located in a single office then what we have to do?
Redistributing OSPF processes can be painful, due to the large number of requirements – type, metric,
metric-type, matching external types and internal type routes
CCNA
OSPF
BGP
STP
RSTP
PORT CHANNEL
HSRP
VRRP
