BGP vs RIP vs Static on LAN

[MetroMan]

I have a network that is linked by a bunch of of ATM over fiber links, essentially 100 an 10mb ethernet extensions.

The problem is the 3 locations are out of ip addresses, so it's time to route and subnet. The locations are as follows: A and B have a 100mb fiber, and A to C has 10mb fiber, we will add B to C with 10mb fiber just to have a full mesh.
Routing will be accomplished by Cisco 3750-24's at each location.
Each location has it's own internet access, so the default route will be local for each subnet, and runs trough cisco 1841's with NAT......SO.....

I was thinking RIP2 for routing, because there will be more subnets added and static routing doesn't fail well... but I was maybe thinking BGP, it looks excellent for the application...but I've been told that it's no good for LAN's.....

I'd like to hear some opinions on the matter....

Thanks!

 

[rudeboy]

Since you are using all cisco routers, why not use EIGRP?

 

[MetroMan]

we may have to connect with a supplier that uses HP Procurve Layer 3 Switches....and Another that uses TelcoSystems Layer 3 Switches.....

 

[plshlpme]

i would think that ospf would be your best bet then since it is not dependant on cisco devices...
its a dynamic classless protocol and pretty easy to set up.


usually bgp is used for wan links where you are receiving a large routing table from the isp.. ie the internet routes. in that case i would still run eigrp or ospf on the lan side and just redistribute into the bgp.

 

[KiscoKid]

Another vote for OSPF

 

[jneiberger]

I also vote for OSPF. BGP is not an interior routing protocol. It is quite useful in situations where it is needed, namely exterior routing, but it isn't designed for interior routing.

 

[vipergg]

OSPF , standards based and fairly easyt o work with with . Get rid of statics .

 

[MetroMan]

A couple of guys here have been trying to disuade me from OSPF, saying it's hard to cinfig and maintin....but it doesn't seem that wasy....

 

[MetroMan]

Would each subnet become it's own AS, or would it all be one AS?

Thanks!

 

[lerdalt]

From the info you've provided I think OSPF is your best bet, especially if you may have to connect with other non-cisco systems.

If it were me, I'd lay it out so your links between locations are all point-to-point interfaces, and then each location could be in its own area. but thats just me. Big thing, is put some network maps together on how you want the network to be laid out and work from kind of a top down approach (top being your connection to the internet).

 

[mainstreetexpress]

another vote for OSPF

 

[jneiberger]

Let me get this straight: you're letting someone tell you not to use the protocol you should be using--OSPF--because it's too complex, but then you want to use one that isn't nearly as good of a choice and is just as hard to maintain as OSPF?

You need to change who you listen to. There's a reason that everyone person answering your post has suggested OSPF.

With regard to running BGP: if you don't already know the answer to your AS question, don't run BGP. OSPF isn't hard. Use it. You'll thank us later.