Afrikaans
Akan
Albanian
Amharic
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Basque
Belarusian
Bemba
Bengali
Bihari
Bosnian
Breton
Bulgarian
Cambodian
Catalan
Cebuano
Cherokee
Chichewa
Chinese (Simplified)
Chinese (Traditional)
Corsican
Croatian
Czech
Danish
Dutch
English
Esperanto
Estonian
Ewe
Faroese
Filipino
Finnish
French
Frisian
Ga
Galician
Georgian
German
Greek
Guarani
Gujarati
Haitian Creole
Hausa
Hawaiian
Hebrew
Hindi
Hmong
Hungarian
Icelandic
Igbo
Indonesian
Interlingua
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Javanese
Kannada
Kazakh
Kinyarwanda
Kirundi
Kongo
Korean
Krio (Sierra Leone)
Kurdish
Kurdish (Soranî)
Kyrgyz
Laothian
Latin
Latvian
Lingala
Lithuanian
Lozi
Luganda
Luo
Luxembourgish
Macedonian
Malagasy
Malay
Malayalam
Maltese
Maori
Marathi
Mauritian Creole
Moldavian
Mongolian
Myanmar (Burmese)
Montenegrin
Nepali
Nigerian Pidgin
Northern Sotho
Norwegian
Norwegian (Nynorsk)
Occitan
Oriya
Oromo
Pashto
Persian
Polish
Portuguese (Brazil)
Punjabi
Quechua
Romanian
Romansh
Runyakitara
Russian
Samoan
Scots Gaelic
Serbian
Serbo-Croatian
Sesotho
Setswana
Seychellois Creole
Shona
Sindhi
Sinhalese
Slovak
Slovenian
Somali
Spanish
Spanish (Latin American)
Sundanese
Swahili
Swedish
Tajik
Tamil
Tatar
Telugu
Thai
Tigrinya
Tonga
Tshiluba
Tumbuka
Turkish
Turkmen
Twi
Uighur
Ukrainian
Urdu
Uzbek
Vietnamese
Welsh
Wolof
Xhosa
Yiddish
Yoruba
Zulu
1
Link state routing protocols however also have drawbacks or disadvantages
2
the first disadvantage is that they have a greater demand for resources
3
than distance vector routing protocols do.
4
Link state routing protocols require more memory
5
the routers have multiple tables
6
so for example, they’ll have a peer table or neighbor table
7
they’ll have a topology table or Link State Database also called LSDB database
8
and they have a routing table.
9
More memory is required to hold multiple tables
10
then would be necessary with a distance vector routing protocol.
11
There’s also more demand on the CPU of the router or switch when running OSPF or ISIS.
12
The Dijkstra algorithm can be very process intensive
13
especially when there are a lot of changes in the topology.
14
Link state routing protocols also requires strict designs
15
in OSPF as an example, area 0 is always required when you have more than 1 area.
16
All other area have to touch the backbone area or area 0.
17
All traffic from 1 area to another area has to traverse the backbone area.
18
The configuration of OSPF is, therefore, more complex
19
than distance vector routing protocol such as RIP.
20
However, the advantages of link state routing protocols generally far out way
21
the disadvantages and this is especially true in large environments.
22
Thus in large topologies, OSPF is seen as a much better choice than RIP.
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get subtitles in any language from opensubtitles.com, and translate them here.