Question? Leave a message!

Performance comparison of eigrp and isis/rip protocols

Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocols (EIGRP) is a CISCO proprietary Protocol. performance comparison of eigrp/ is-is and ospf/ is-is.Download free ppt
A Detail Qualitative Performance Evaluation of Integrated EIGRP/ISIS and RIP/ISIS Routing Protocols in Hybrid NetworksAbstract ◎PROBLEM STATEMENT: This Research work presents a simulation based analysis of Routing Information Protocol (RIP), Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP) and Intermediate System to Intermediate System (ISIS) protocols. We used the combination of EIGRPISIS, RIPISIS routing protocols on the Hybrid network in order to reveal the advantage of one over the other as well as the robustness of each protocol. With Respect To Several Performance Metrics: ◎ (1) Database Query Response Time ◎ (2) Email Download Response Time ◎ (3) HTTP Object Response Time ◎ (4) Throughput Simulation Tool Used: OPNET Modeller 14.5 and 16.0Thesis Aims and Objective 1. Develop and design a simulation model and scenarios for integrated EIGRP/ISIS and RIP/ISIS routing protocols in hybrid networks. 2. Perform a simulation on different scenarios and evaluate via different metrics. 3. Analysis of the results in Hybrid environment. 4. Comparative study has been done on the basis of simulation results. 5. Deriving a conclusion on basis of performance evaluation.Open Shortest Path First (RFC 1247) Uses IP, has a value in the IP Header (8 bit protocol field)  Interior routing protocol, its domain is also an autonomous system  Special routers (autonomous system boundary routers) or backbone routers responsible to dissipate information about other AS into the current system.  Divides an AS into areas  Metric based on type of service Minimum delay (rtt), maximum throughput, reliability, etc..OSPF (type of links) “OSPF (link state advertisement) Network Link Router LinkCharacteristics of OSPF  OSPF provides load balancing by distributing traffic through multiple routes to a given destination .  It allows maximum flexibility and provides transfer and tagging of external routes injected into AS.  It helps exchange information obtained from external sites. Runs directly over IP.  Provides authenticated routing updates using different methods of authentication.  It has low bandwidth utilization and ensures less processing burden on routers because updates are only sent when changes occur.ISIS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System Routing Protocol) ◎ It is also a linkstate routing protocol with several similarities with OSPF protocol, such as the use of the same SPF algorithm. ◎ It was defined by ISO (International Organization for Standardization). ◎ ISIS is based on the primer OSI (Open System Interconnection) reference model.Simple ISIS NetworkAdvantages and Drawbacks of ISIS Advantages ◎ Fast convergence. For transmitting routing information, ISIS utilizes a low number of packet types. ◎Support large areas of several intermediate systems without degradation of SPF performance. ◎ It does not implement virtual links ◎ Scalable. Backbone is not an area in ISIS but instead is a collection of contiguous ABRs. ◎Simple to implement. Drawbacks ◎Metrics are 6 bit wide (063). Default metric is 10 if it is not manually specified. ◎All areas in ISIS networks are stub areas which may result in suboptimal routing between areas. ◎All ISs must have identical views of an area. ◎For node identification, NSAP addresses are needed in combination with Connectionless Network Protocol (CLNP) as an additional network layer protocol.EIGRP ◎ Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocols (EIGRP) is a CISCO proprietary Protocol ◎ It is an enhancement of the interior gateway routing protocol (IGRP). ◎ EIGRP was released in 1992 as a more scalable protocol for medium and large scale networks. ◎ It is a widely used interior gateway routing protocol which uses Diffusion Update Algorithm (DUAL) for computation of routes. ◎ EIGRP is also known as hybrid protocol because it has the properties of a link state protocol for creating neighbor relationships and of a distance vector routing protocol for advertisement of routes.Components of EIGRP  Neighbor Discovery/Recovery  Reliable transport protocol (RTP)  Diffusion Update Algorithm (DUAL)  Protocol Dependent Modules (PDM) Advantages and Drawbacks of EIGRP • EIGRP provides the following advantages : Loop free routes are provided. It additionally saves a back up path to reach the destination. Multiple network layer protocols are supported Convergence time for EIGRP is low which in turn reduces the bandwidth utilization. Supports VLSM, discontinuous network and classless routing. Routing update authentication is supported by EIGRP. Topology table is maintained instead of the routing table and consist of best path and an addition loop free path. Drawbacks of EIGRP are It’s a Cisco proprietary routing protocol. Routers from other vendors cannot utilize EIGRP.Routing Information System (RIP)  RIP is a distance vector routing protocol and uses hop count as it’s metrics for determining best path and also uses UDP (User Datagram Protocols) port for message encapsulation.  Hop count measures the distance travelled by a data packet. The maximum number of hop count is 15, thereby preventing routing loops.  RIP updates its routing table after every 30 seconds.  Each router maintains its routing table by sending periodic updates to communicate with its neighbor routers. RIP uses BellmanFord Distance Vector algorithm to determine the best path.  RIP has three versions: RIPv1 (Routing Information Protocol Version), RIPv2 ( Routing Information Protocol Version 2), RIPNG (Routing Information Protocol Next Generation)Characteristics of Routing Information Protocol (RIP) · RIP is easy and efficient in smaller networks and thus require little management. · RIP is mainly based on hop counts vector. · A fixed subnet mask length is used. · RIP supports IP and IPX routing. · RIP routes have an administrative distance is 120. Advantages of Routing Information Protocol · Easy and efficient in smaller networks. · Easy configuration. · Low resource usage. Disadvantages of Routing Information protocol · Loop creation. · Slow convergence. · Scalability problem. · Lack of metrics.Example of a domain using RIP◎ Literature Review D. Pei et al. show the design and development of a method for detecting RIP routing updates. Specifically, RIPTP protocol is presented. It uses hop count as routing metric. The authors emphasize its efficiency, simplicity, low operating cost and compatibility with the standard RIP. In order to assess the design efficiency, they show a series of experimental simulations to demonstrate that it is possible the improvement of fault detection in routing protocols. They particularize these evidences with RIP. A. Basu et al., studies the stability of the OSPF protocol under steady state and with interferences. In this study we will see what effects are given by the TE (Traffic Engineering) extensions on the stability of a network when OSPF is running. OSPF TE extensions provide mechanisms for ensuring that all network nodes have a consistent view of the traffic parameters associated with the network. The authors also analyze whether it is possible to accelerate the convergence time of the network, analyzing the Hello packets and the number of route flaps.B. Albrightson et al. They explain that EIGRP is a protocol based on a hybrid routing algorithm, sharing some properties of distance vector and link state algorithms. This protocol is the first Internet protocol that addressed the loop problem. Other aspects which shows are the type of metrics, the transport mechanisms and the methods used to discover the networks, among other features. Ittiphon krinpayorm et al. applied the EIGRP algorithm to an application based on Maude. Maude is a programming language for formal specifications using algebraic terms. It is an interpreted language that allows the verification of properties and transformations on models that can run the model like a prototype. The authors show how to build an infrastructure of processes implemented by Maude, giving the chance to send a message directly to a neighbor or broadcast to all neighbors. EIGRP protocol implements the top of this basic infrastructure. Finally, the global system is tested and analyzed.Simulation Tool Used  This Dissertation work using OPNET Modeler16.0 Network Simulator.  OPNET Modeler16.0 is a Commercial Network Simulator.  Designed for modelling communication devices, technologies, and protocols and to simulate the performance of these technologies.  Figure : OPNET 16.0◎Proposed MethodologyEIGRP/ISIS ScenarioRIP/ISIS TopologyRESULTSRIP Traffic 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 RIP 8000 RIPISIS 6000 4000 2000 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minEIGRP Traffic 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 EIGRP 8000 EIGRPISIS 6000 4000 2000 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minEIGRP Convergence Time 3.5 3 2.5 2 EIGRP EIGRPISIS 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minISIS Convergence Time 3.5 3 2.5 2 ISIS EIGRPISIS 1.5 RIPISIS 1 0.5 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minDatabase Query Response Time 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 ISIS 2.5 EIGRPISIS RIPISIS 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minEmail Download Response Time 4 3.5 3 2.5 ISIS 2 EIGRPISIS RIPISIS 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minHTTP Object Response Time 6 5 4 ISIS 3 EIGRPISIS RIPISIS 2 1 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minThroughput 9 8 7 6 5 ISIS RIPISIS 4 EIGRPISIS 3 2 1 0 0 min. 5 min. 10 min. 20 min. 25 min 30 minConclusion The objective of this thesis was to configure multiple routing protocols on a selected network topology and analyze the performance of the network. We aimed to configure RIP and ISIS together in one network, then EIGRP and ISIS together in one another network. After configuring the protocols we analyzed the network performance improvements as compared to the network that use RIP alone, EIGRP alone or ISIS alone. The RIP traffic in the network using RIP/ISIS is smaller than of network using only RIP. This indicates that the bandwidth utilization of RIP is better and the link congestion probability is smaller in RIP/ISIS network than that of network using only RIP.Conclusion …. The EIGRP traffic in the network using EIGRP/ISIS is lower than of network using only EIGRP. This indicates that the bandwidth utilization of EIGRP is better in the EIGRP/ISIS network than that of network using only EIGRP. Convergence time of EIGRP in the network using EIGRP/ISIS network is much faster than in the network using only EIGRP. Therefore the nodes in EIGRP/ISIS network learn the topology faster than the nodes in the EIGRP network. ISIS convergence time in EIGRP/ISIS network is much faster than in ISIS network or RIP/ISIS network. On the other hand, ISIS network shows lower convergence time than the EIGRP/ISIS network or the RIP/ISIS network. EIGRP/ISIS network learns all nodes in the whole network faster than of ISIS network or RIP/ISIS network. And ISIS network learns slower than of the other two networks.“ Future Work ◎ In future work, werecommend any interested researcher to combine EIGRP and ISIS routing protocols performs on MANET and Hybrid networks, and make one advanced routingprotocol. ◎ This can be doneby analyzing the source code of each protocoland make a modificationon the codes.References 1 Vishal sharma, Rajneesh Narula and Sameer khullar“Performance Analysis of IEEE 802.3 using IGRP and EIGRP RoutingProtocols” International Journal of Computer Applications Volume 44– No13, April 2012 2 Ittiphon krinpayorm and Suwat Pattaramalai,"Link Recovery Comparison Between OSPF EIGRP ", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 756–767, May 2009. 3, Y. Navaneeth Krishnan NajamUlSahar, "Simulation of OSPF Routing Protocol Using OPNET Module" Communication Systems and Networks, 2011 Third International Conference on, 2011, pp. 120125. 4 Bernard Fortz,Jennifer Rexford and Mikkel Thorup., Traffic Engineering With Traditional IP Routing Protocols." IEEE Communications Magazine. October 2002, pp. 118124. 5 Ahmad Karim, Minhaj Ahmad Khan "Behaviour of Routing Protocols for Medium to Large Scale Networks", Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(6): 16051613, 2011Continued….. 6 E. Dahlman, S. Parkvall, J. Skold, P. Beming,3G Evolution HSPA and LTE for Mobile Broadband. 2nd ed. Elsevier Ltd. 2008. 7 Shen Yang, Dai Hao; Qi Qangdong“Performance comparisons between OSPF and EIGRP in tactical IPnetworks” (Inst. of Command Autom, PLA Univ. of Sci. Tech. Nanjing, China); Source: Journal of PLA University of Science and Technology (Natural Science Edition), v 6, n 3, p2 415, June 2000. 8 GarciaLunaAceves, J, J.; Zaumen, W.T“Areabased loopfree internetrouting” Source: Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 94. The Conference on Computer Communications. Networking for Global Communications, 10008 vol.3,1994. 9 Kisten, S. PingTsai Chung.”Analysis and experimentation on dynamic routing protocols: EIGRP andOSPF”(Dept. of Computer Science, Long Island Univ., Brooklyn, NY, USA); Source: International Conference on Internet Computing IC'03, p 5913 Vol.2, 2003. 10 Thorenoor, S.G.”Dynamic Routing Protocol Implementation Decision between EIGRP, OSPF and RIP Based on Technical Background Using OPNET Modeler” Source: Proceedings of the 2010 Second International Conference on Computer and Network Technology (ICCNT 2010), p 1915, 2010.Thanks Any questions You can find us at