Operation of RIP
RIP Timers and Stability Features
RIP Message Format
Request Message Types
Classful Routing
Configuring RIP
Case Study: A Basic RIP Configuration
Case Study: Passive Interfaces
Configuring Unicast Updates
Case Study: Discontiguous Subnets
Case Study: Manipulating RIP Metrics
Troubleshooting RIP
The oldest of the distance vector IP routing protocols still in widespread use, RIP currently exists in two
versions. This chapter deals with version 1 of RIP. Chapter 7, "Routing Information Protocol Version 2,"
covers version 2, which adds several enhancements to RIPv1. Most notably, RIPv1 is a classful routing
protocol, whereas RIPv2 is classless. This chapter introduces classful routing, and Chapter 7 introduces
classless routing.
Distance vector protocols, based on the algorithms developed by Bellman,[1] Ford, and Fulkerson,[2] were
implemented as early as 1969 in networks such as ARPANET and CYCLADES. In the mid-1970s Xerox
developed a protocol called PARC[3] Universal Protocol, or PUP, to run on its 3Mbps experimental
predecessor to modern Ethernet. PUP was routed by the Gateway Information Protocol (GWINFO). PUP
evolved into the Xerox Network Systems (XNS) protocol suite; concurrently, the Gateway Information
Protocol became the XNS Routing Information Protocol. In turn, XNS RIP has become the precursor of
such common routing protocols as Novell's IPX RIP, AppleTalk's Routing Table Maintenance Protocol
(RTMP), and, of course, IP RIP.
The 4.2 Berkeley Software Distribution of UNIX, released in 1982, implemented RIP in a daemon called
routed; many more recent versions of UNIX are based on the popular 4.2BSD and implement RIP in
either routed or gated. [4] Oddly enough, a standard for RIP was not released until 1988, after the protocol
was in extensive deployment. That was RFC 1058, written by Charles Hedrick, and it remains the only
formal standard of RIPv1.
Depending on the literature one reads, RIP is either unjustly maligned or undeservedly popular. Although
it does not have the capabilities of many of its successors, its simplicity and widespread use mean that compatibility problems between implementations are rare. RIP was designed for smaller internetworks in
which the data links are fairly homogeneous. Within these constraints, and especially within many UNIX
environments, RIP will continue to be a popular routing protocol. 112