Abstract
As the Internet slowly transitions towards IPv6, the routing protocols that are used to forward traffic across this global network must adapt to support this gradual transition. Two of the most frequently discussed interior dynamic routing protocols today are the IETF’s OSPF and Cisco’s EIGRP routing protocol. A wealth of papers have compared OSPF and EIGRP in terms of converge times and resource usage, however few papers have assessed the performance of each when implementing their respective security mechanisms. Therefore a comparison of OSPFv3 and EIGRPv6 will be conducted using dedicated Cisco hardware. This paper will firstly introduce each protocol and its security mechanisms, before conducting a comparison of OSPFv3 and EIGRPv6 using Cisco equipment. After discussing the simulation results, a conclusion will be drawn to reveal the findings of this paper and which protocol performs the best upon implementing their respective security mechanisms within a small IPv6 enterprise network.
Highlights
Two of the most discussed IPv6 routing protocols amongst researchers are the IETF’s Open Shortest Path First Version 3 (OSPFv3) and Cisco’s Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol for IPv6 (EIGRPv6)
This section will discuss the results generated by testing OSPFv3 and EIGRPv6 and their security mechanisms, in Scenarios 1 and 2
This paper finds that upon comparing the performance of OSPFv3 and EIGRPv6 using the tests that have been conducted throughout this project, EIGRPv6 was the faster performing protocol
Summary
Two of the most discussed IPv6 routing protocols amongst researchers are the IETF’s Open Shortest Path First Version 3 (OSPFv3) and Cisco’s Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol for IPv6 (EIGRPv6). No comparisons have been conducted to assess the additional effects when implementing the respective authentication and encryption mechanisms of OSPFv3 and EIGPRv6. Due to the popularity of OSPFv3 and EIGRPv6, it is critical that a through comparison is conducted to comprehensively assess both protocols when operating within a small IPv6 enterprise network. It should be noted that in recent years, a key drawback of EIGRP has been its proprietary nature. As discussed by [5], EIGRP is been opened up to the IETF and will soon no longer be a drawback
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
