Routing protocols mainly aim at identifying available routes which exist within a company’s network, developing routing tables and generating routing decisions. The most common routing protocols which can be implemented within a WAN include OSPF, IGRP, and EIGRP. The routing protocols are divided in two major types such as distance vector protocols and link state protocols.
Implementations of routing protocols
Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP) is an example of a routing protocol that is necessary to accommodate the company’s wide area network. EIGRP routing protocol is hybrid in nature established for the sake of routing several protocols over a company’s Cisco network. The protocol shares the features of link state routing protocols as well as well as that of distance vector routing protocols. In addition, Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) is also a routing protocol that can accommodate the company’s wide area network. OSPF is known to be a state protocol established as an open standard focused on routing IP over various multivendor networks. The protocol utilizes a hierarchy with assigned areas that connects to the backbone of various routers. Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (IGRP) is also necessary in this case as it will ensure the routing of a number of protocols over the medium sized network established by the company. The routing protocol is scalable in nature based on the fact that it supports 100 hop counts.
The use of each Protocol on WAN
According to Fiţigău, Tomai and Toderean (2015), EIGRP operates efficiently over a WAN context. EIGRP is used on Frame relay and X.25. Prevalently, the routing protocol is known to be scalable when it comes to point-to-point links. OSPF is used for link interconnection in a WAN. Within the WAN, the EIGRP works by routing several protocols over the company’s network. In addition, it also plays an important role when it comes to the identification of the best path destination. Furthermore, the protocol also has the capacity to load balance traffic over metric cost path as well as providing a summary of subnet boundaries. The EIGRP plays an important role of detecting the loss of routes through relying upon small hello packets to determine the existing relationship between the packets to ascertain if there is any lost packet. OSPF on the other hand is used for connecting to a core backbone of the available routers in the system. The IGRP on the other hand resets flush as well as invalid timers after receiving a route update. Incases when a route looses direction, further updates on the network come to a halt with an increase in the flush and invalid timers before the IGRP flushes them out of the routing table. The IGRP also plays a role of reducing any chances of routing loops development. The main techniques implemented by the protocol includes split horizon, poison-reverse and hold-down timers
The EIGRP is used in monitoring traffic by implementing a distance vector algorithm. According to Fiţigău, Tomai and Toderean(2015), the system under the WAN will log into EIGRP neighbor adjacency changes to aid in monitoring the changes that assists in monitoring stability of the routing system as well as detecting any problems. It is also evident that EIGRP monitors traffic by establishing a neighbor relationship where the protocol monitors the behavior of the packets to establish if there is any misplaced one before recording traffic.
Step 1: hostname(config)# route inside 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.2.45 1
Step 2: hostname(config)# route outside 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.1 hostname(config)# route outside 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.2 hostname(config)# route outside 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.3 hostname(config)# route outside 0 192.168.2.4 tunneled (Fowdur & Rughooputh, 2010).
The identified step include the creation of a static route whose main aim will be send traffic to all the intended destinations of the network connected within the interface. This is followed by a second step where all the static routes are defined in order to direct traffic to the available gateways, add a default route, and distribute traffic to all the specified gateways on the network.
I would recommend the company to implement distance vector protocols other than the link state protocols. As is, distance vector protocols function by providing an advertisement of their routing table directly to the available packet neighbor at frequent intervals which are also regular in that case. In cases where a route becomes unavailable, an update of the router tables must be initiated where the tables are provided with new information. However, the problem noticed in this case is that when each router advertises new information to its neighbors, a considerate amount of time is consumed for the routers to obtain a current and accurate network outlook. Distance vector protocols utilize fixed length subnet masks that are not scalable in nature. They only advertise routing updates only at times when they take place which effectively uses bandwidth. Fiţigău, Tomai and Toderean(2015) posit that routers do not advertise the routing table that results in a fast convergence. In this case, the routing protocol will result to network flooding with advertisements to all the available routers in the network as a way of converging the network with more route information.