1. SISM TCP IP Interface Sockets Middleware/Application z/OS System A SMC-D IP Network (HiperSockets) TCP connection establishment over IP Dynamic (in-line) negotiation for SMC-D is initiated by presence of TCP Options TCP syn flows (with TCP Options CLC indicating SMC-D capability) ISM VCHID (within System z) TCP connection transitions to SMC-D allowing application data to be exchanged using Direct Memory Access (LPAR to LPAR) data exchanged using native PCI operations (PCI STB) data exchanged using native PCI operations (PCI STB) HiperSockets and ISM have the same PNet ID e.g. PNet1 System z13 © 2020 IBM Corporation
2. 10. HiperSockets Comparison Up to 9x the throughput! See breakout summary on next chart. * All performance information was determined in a controlled environment. Actual results may vary. Performance information is provided “AS IS” and no warranties or guarantees are expressed or implied by IBM. © 2020 IBM Corporation
3. 11. HiperSockets Comparison Same benchmarks as shown on the previous chart – summarized here in 3 categories: 1. transactional small 2. transactional large 3. streaming Note. R/R (request /response) = transactional SMC-D / ISM to HiperSockets Summary Highlights § Request/Response Summary for Workloads with 1k/1k – 4k/4k Payloads: – Latency: Up to 48% reduction in latency – Throughput: Up to 91% increase in throughput – CPU cost: Up to 47% reduction in network related CPU cost § Request/Response Summary for Workloads with 8k/8k – 32k/32k Payloads: – Latency: Up to 82% reduction in latency – Throughput: Up to 475% (~6x) increase in throughput – CPU cost: Up to 82% reduction in network related CPU cost § Streaming Workload: – Latency: Up to 89% reduction in latency – Throughput: Up to 800% (~9x) increase in throughput – CPU cost: Up to 89% reduction in network related CPU cost * All performance information was determined in a controlled environment. Actual results may vary. Performance

The choices for routing protocols are EGP, BGP, RIP, RIPng, HELLO, OSPF, ICMP/Router Discovery, and IS-IS. You can also use SNMP, a protocol allowing you to change or show management information for a network element from a remote host.

Yep yep,

An interior gateway protocol (IGP) or Interior routing protocol is a type of routing protocol used for exchanging routing table information between gateways (commonly routers) within an autonomous system (for example, a system of corporate local area networks).^[1] This routing information can then be used to route network-layer protocols like IP.

Interior gateway protocols can be divided into two categories: distance-vector routing protocols and link-state routing protocols. Specific examples of IGPs include Open Shortest Path First(OSPF), Routing Information Protocol(RIP), Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) and Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP).^[2]

By contrast, exterior gateway protocolsare used to exchange routing information between autonomous systems and rely on IGPs to resolve routes within an autonomous system.

Here we are

RIPng

RIPng (RIP next generation) is an extension of RIPv2 for support of IPv6, the next generation Internet Protocol.^[12]The main differences between RIPv2 and RIPng are:

• Support of IPv6 networking.
• While RIPv2 supports RIPv1 updates authentication, RIPng does not. IPv6 routers were, at the time,^[13] supposed to use IPsec for authentication.
• RIPv2 encodes the next-hop into each route entry, RIPng requires specific encoding of the next hop for a set of route entries.

RIPng sends updates on UDP port 521 using the multicast group ff02::9.

RIPv1 MessagesEdit

RIP defined two types of messages:Request MessageAsking a neighbouring RIPv1 enabled router to send its routing table.Response MessageCarries the routing table of a router.

TimersEdit

The routing information protocol uses the following timers as part of its operation:^[14]Update TimerControls the interval between two gratuitous Response Messages. By default the value is 30 seconds. The response message is broadcast to all its RIP enabled interface.^[14]Invalid TimerThe invalid timer specifies how long a routing entry can be in the routing table without being updated. This is also called as expiration Timer. By default, the value is 180 seconds. After the timer expires the hop count of the routing entry will be set to 16, marking the destination as unreachable.^[14]Flush TimerThe flush timer controls the time between the route is invalidated or marked as unreachable and removal of entry from the routing table. By default the value is 240 seconds. This is 60 seconds longer than Invalid timer. So for 60 seconds the router will be advertising about this unreachable route to all its neighbours. This timer must be set to a higher value than the invalid timer.^[14]Holddown TimerThe hold-down timer is started per route entry, when the hop count is changing from lower value to higher value. This allows the route to get stabilized. During this time no update can be done to that routing entry. This is not part of the RFC 1058. This is Cisco’s implementation. The default value of this timer is 180 seconds.^[14]

• Cisco IOS, software used in Cisco routers (supports version 1, version 2 and RIPng)
• Cisco NX-OS software used in Cisco Nexus data center switches (supports RIPv2 only^[16])
• Junos software used in Juniper routers, switches, and firewalls (supports RIPv1 and RIPv2)
• Routing and Remote Access, a Windows Server feature, contains RIP support
• Quagga, a free open source softwarerouting suite based on GNU Zebra
• BIRD, a free open source softwarerouting suite
• Zeroshell, a free open source softwarerouting suite
• A RIP implementation first introduced in 4.2BSD, routed, survives in several of its descendants, including FreeBSD^[17] and NetBSD.^[18]
• OpenBSD introduced a new implementation, ripd, in version 4.1^[19]and retired routed in version 4.4.
• Netgear routers commonly offer a choice of two implementations of RIPv2;^[20] these are labelled RIP_2M and RIP_2B. RIP_2M is the standard RIPv2 implementation using multicasting – which requires all routers on the network to support RIPv2 and multicasting, whereas RIP_2B sends RIPv2 packets using subnet broadcasting – making it more compatible with routers that do not support multicasting, including RIPv1 routers.
• Huawei HG633 ADSL/VDSL routers support passive and active routing with RIP v1 & v2 on the LAN and WAN side.

Similar protocolsEdit

Cisco‘s proprietary Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (IGRP) was a somewhat more capable protocol than RIP. It belongs to the same basic family of distance-vector routing protocols. 

Cisco has ceased support and distribution of IGRP in their router software. It was replaced by the Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP) which is a completely new design. While EIGRP still uses a distance-vector model, it relates to IGRP only in using the same composite routing metric. Both IGRP and EIGRP calculated a single composite metric for each route, from a formula of five variables: bandwidth, delay, reliability, load, and MTU; though on Cisco routers, by default, only bandwidth and delay are used in this calculation.

S

“Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry”. http://www.iana.org. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). p. 10. Retrieved 25 February 2022.^ Jeff Doyle & Jennifer Carroll (2005). CCIE Professional Development: Routing TCP/IP Volume I, Second Edition. ciscopress.com. p. 169. ISBN9781587052026.^ Jump up to: ^ab C. Hedrick (June 1988). Routing Information Protocol. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC1058. RFC1058.Historic. Updated by RFC 1388 and 1723.^ Jump up to: ^abcde Jeff Doyle & Jennifer Carroll (2005). CCIE Professional Development: Routing TCP/IP Volume I, Second Edition. ciscopress.com. p. 170. ISBN9781587052026.^ Jeff Doyle & Jennifer Carroll (2005). CCIE Professional Development: Routing TCP/IP Volume I, Second Edition. ciscopress.com. p. 171. ISBN9781587052026.^The Synchronization of Periodic Routing Messages, S. Floyd & V. Jacobson,April 1994^ Jeff Doyle & Jennifer Carroll (2005). CCIE Professional Development: Routing TCP/IP Volume I, Second Edition. ciscopress.com. p. 175. ISBN9781587052026.^ G. Malkin (November 1994). RIP Version 2 – Carrying Additional Information. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC1723. RFC1723.Obsolete. Obsoleted by RFC 2453. Obsoletes RFC 1388. Updates RFC 1058.^ Jump up to: ^ab G. Malkin (November 1998). RIP Version 2. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC2453. STD 53. RFC2453. Internet Standard. Obsoletes RFC 1723 and 1388. Updated by RFC 4822.^F. Baker; R. Atkinson (January 1997). RIP-2 MD5 Authentication. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC2082. RFC2082.Obsolete. Obsoleted by RFC 4822.^ R. Atkinson; M. Fanto (February 2007). RIPv2 Cryptographic Authentication. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC4822. RFC4822. Proposed Standard. Obsoletes RFC 2082. Updates RFC 2453.^ G. Malkin; R. Minnear (January 1997). RIPng for IPv6. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC2080. RFC2080.G. Malkin (January 1997). RIPng Protocol Applicability Statement. Network Working Group. doi:10.17487/RFC2080. RFC2080.Proposed Standard.^Juniper Networks JNCIP-ENT. Cardiff, United Kingdom.^ Jump up to: ^abcde Balchunas, Aaron. “Routing Information Protocol (RIP v1.03)”(PDF). routeralley.com. Archived (PDF)from the original on 10 October 2022. Retrieved 25 April 2014.^ C. Hendrik (June 1988). “RFC 1058 Section 2.2”. Routing Information Protocol. The Internet Society. doi:10.17487/RFC1058.^“Cisco Nexus 9000 Series NX-OS Unicast Routing Configuration Guide, Release 6.x – Configuring RIP [Cisco Nexus 9000 Series Switches]”.^“routed, rdisc – network RIP and router discovery routing daemon”. FreeBSD manual pages.^“routed, rdisc – network RIP and router discovery routing daemon”. NetBSD manual pages.^“ripd – Routing Information Protocol daemon”. OpenBSD manual pages.^“How do I change the LAN TCP/IP settings on my Nighthawk router?”. Netgear Support pages.

• alkin, Gary Scott (2000). RIP: An Intra-Domain Routing Protocol. Addison-Wesley Longman. ISBN 0-201-43320-6.
• Edward A. Taft, Gateway Information Protocol (revised) (Xerox Parc, Palo Alto, May, 1979)
• Xerox System Integration Standard – Internet Transport Protocols (Xerox, Stamford, 1981)

Last edited 15 days ago by OAbot

RELATED ARTICLES

• Open Shortest Path FirstRouting protocol for IP networks
• SubnetworkLogical subdivision of an IP network
• Distance-vector routing 

history

Article Talk

Routing Information Protocol

28 January 2023

• OAbotOpen access bot: doi added to citation with #oabot.m18:26+16

10 October 2022

• Rlink2→‎Timers: Adding archives WP:LINKROTm17:34+139

28 August 2022

• Citation botAdd: doi. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Abductive | #UCB_webform 2854/385020:31+22

30 April 2022

• Stephenamills→‎Similar protocols: A single composite metric is calculated for each EIGRP route – that routing protocol was mentioned in this section for comparison05:34+151

27 April 2022

• 116.90.121.63→‎RIPng10:27+9
• 116.90.121.63→‎RIPng10:25+154

25 February 2022

• AnomieBOTDating maintenance tags: {{Citation needed}}m12:52+19
• Dandorid→‎RIP version 1: hide rfc from textm12:31−22
• Dandorid→‎Development of distance-vector routing: ref to rfc105812:29+19
• Dandorid→‎RIP messages between routers: remove duplicate refsm12:24−86
• Dandorid→‎RIPng: RFC208012:19−153
• Dandorid→‎RIP version 2: {{Ref RFC}}12:10−354
• Dandorid→‎RIP version 1: Fixed ref to RFC1058 (wrong author name).11:41−74
• Dandorid→‎Development of distance-vector routingm11:31−1
• Dandorid→‎top: Fixed ref.11:28−147

16 December 2021

• 85.153.232.189→‎RIPng18:03−7
• 85.153.232.189→‎RIPng18:03+7

5 December 2021

• GoingBatty→‎External links: removed empty section04:07−935

22 November 2021

• Citation botAlter: template type. Add: title, date. Changed bare reference to CS1/2. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by BrownHairedGirl | Linked from User:BrownHairedGirl/Articles_with_bare_links | #UCB_webform_linked 911/218514:53+182

24 October 2021

• Eddyd101Removed a dead linkm07:10−4

20 July 2021

• WikiCleanerBotv2.04b – Bot T20 CW#61 – Fix errors for CW project (Reference before punctuation)m00:26−1

14 July 2021

• 108.51.75.100Use definition lists for lists of defined terms14:40−3
• 108.51.75.100Minor copy edits; fix a reference link.14:34+19

12 May 2021

• 82.209.166.76→‎Development of distance-vector routing13:45+1

23 February 2021

• Comp.archno edit summarym12:13−1

16 February 2021

• Efenwelfix link to hopm11:30−8

3 February 2021

• 2601:585:8300:b130:dc57:77a0:6985:e594no edit summary14:08−1
• 2601:585:8300:b130:dc57:77a0:6985:e594no edit summary14:07+1

27 December 2020

• MonkbotTask 18 (cosmetic): eval 12 templates: hyphenate params (2×);m00:24+2

12 December 2020

• JohnuniqUndid revision 993770724 by 196.77.51.93 (talk) any reason?22:36
• 196.77.51.93→‎RIP messages between routers12:00

1 November 2020

• Bender the Bot→‎top: HTTP → HTTPS for Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, replaced: http://www.iana.org/ → https://www.iana.org/m21:43+1

28 September 2020

• Dawnseeker2000date format audit, minor formatting, typo(s) fixed: Therefore → Therefore,m13:00−1,091

10 August 2020

• 106.69.76.122Incorrect plural12:50−1

8 July 2020

• MichaelMaggsRollback edit(s) by 221.121.44.241 (talk): Vandalism (RedWarn rev14)m20:38−78
• 221.121.44.241no edit summary20:37+78

7 July 2020

• 192.28.122.2no edit summary03:58+1

12 May 2020

• Johnuniqrv2: why?06:40−10
• 77.69.191.250no edit summary06:09+6
• 77.69.191.250no edit summary06:08+4

3 May 2020

• KH-1Reverted edits by 1.46.111.166 (talk) to last version by KH-1m03:53+1,220
• 1.46.111.166no edit summary03:53−1,220
• KH-1Reverted edits by 1.46.111.166 (talk) to last version by 202.140.47.54m03:52+1,528
• 1.46.111.166no edit summary03:52−1,528

6 February 2020

• 202.140.47.54Removed an erroneous edit from before07:03−26
• 202.140.47.54Published required added information07:01+26

29 December 2019

• SirfurboyUndid revision 932201794 by Cunnfum (talk) Deleting problematic edit from a confirmed and blocked sockpuppet09:23−533

24 December 2019

• Cunnfumno edit summary04:08+533

5 November 2019

• WtmitchellReverted edits by 182.75.25.228 (talk) (HG) (3.4.9)m11:29−14
• 182.75.25.228the protocol11:26+14

older 50

• Open main menu
• Search
• Routing Information Protocol: Difference between revisions
• Article Talk
• ← Previous edit
• Next edit →
• Routing Information Protocol (edit)
• Revision as of 11:29, 5 November 2019
•  14 BYTES REMOVED,  3 YEARS AGO
• m
• Reverted edits by 182.75.25.228 (talk) (HG) (3.4.9)
• {{Use dmy dates|date=May 2013}}
• The ”’Routing Information Protocol”’ (”’RIP”’) termi rose A  is one of the oldest [[distance-vector routing protocols]] which employ the [[Hopcount|hop count]] as a [[Metrics (networking)|routing metric]]. RIP prevents [[Routing loop problem|routing loops]] by implementing a limit on the number of [[Hop (telecommunications)|hops]] allowed in a path from source to destination. The largest number of hops allowed for RIP is 15, which limits the size of networks that RIP can support. 
• RIP implements the [[split horizon]], [[route poisoning]] and [[holddown]] mechanisms to prevent incorrect routing information from being propagated.
• Wtmitchell
• ADMINISTRATORS
• 144,212
• EDITS