From nobody Thu Jan 26 20:53:30 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4P2tQQ5R2dz3bydf for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 21:00:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@netgate.com) Received: from mail-oi1-x232.google.com (mail-oi1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4P2tQQ0Bhcz3nJt for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 21:00:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@netgate.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-oi1-x232.google.com with SMTP id r9so2519082oig.12 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:00:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netgate.com; s=google; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=IxHDTJyq6AChNCukvYRaxsYau9OencoAZ5rvtT5cjc4=; b=NT1HKKnUEirWpjP3GqEU+kAZdf3cx3Ysas9SyYaaDfGFeIwR0h2UVd3RGJiYXUcMN8 Klv0edCw1kfq1mG2o8ELZLSCkjPBc3q+6FuTgI5JORypBILWa+c3q36zdjxyRwnk2R/+ m5ZPtFrzNhp87A4w2zbcSbeJAWWQTADpz/Hg4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=IxHDTJyq6AChNCukvYRaxsYau9OencoAZ5rvtT5cjc4=; b=zUvtr++LdN36ESJ5gM8XST/PkGKll5S7Xf2zFtsZLxZCMJ3ReOZHnP/Jzp/R6iOYsP kn9yb0vwK7bHPzplABQE/dWL4gHimkloTkjo6OxZdGJv6c5qFJOQIgBCgQ15C9GsKkSa TDAH43BNVCtCrXKxqMwUMsqI+kOPfEI5/s90V2/IWc7ei2ZItyo86Nm2yK5VsgHY2G0F VXpjvL5ix6funzd4xWyzvkkZB/AfP6LXizeIYmhfJ7bR9xwmWQCcVM5zhgxUB+VNbsUi k2CnXetPvPHBOrGqTwMACf3tg8WD5OMuUVqExz/uDV8iBHZNRy+fyBCQ8ZcKLg+mER3K Nerw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2koAh0+KJDK6n06xQabBjLXdREGTEXUXI5LdsgBQ393iOdaBc3kh FgBtWiResJCvhG5xf2DmPgHJ0DXDtQcvLORA X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXvm/vsn3uHFc0LLBRelmpvwFXTrS0sbKl5Lr6fDO4S4jPNHh3GpaJVJ8on/RHPsOp2dVhpE5w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:2093:b0:364:8b38:b4d3 with SMTP id s19-20020a056808209300b003648b38b4d3mr21740106oiw.26.1674766828699; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:00:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2607:fb90:f20b:dc64:752b:1ef0:44fd:b9e6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v23-20020a056830091700b00670641eb272sm964607ott.20.2023.01.26.13.00.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Jan 2023 13:00:27 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Jim Thompson List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: Any reason to not implement VRRP in FreeBSD? Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 14:53:30 -0600 Message-Id: References: <3f0f88f77e77faf559607d0a8117aea252b7b5c0.camel@stormshield.eu> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <3f0f88f77e77faf559607d0a8117aea252b7b5c0.camel@stormshield.eu> To: Nicolas MASSE X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (20D47) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4P2tQQ0Bhcz3nJt X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N FreeBSD has always been free to have a VRRP implementation. =20 The smoke and mirrors FUD managed to prevent same to this point, but it was a= lways FUD.=20 Jim > On Jan 26, 2023, at 10:08 AM, Nicolas MASSE = wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFHi all, >=20 > Currently, i'm investigating solutions in order to ensure some > redundancy at the IP level. More specifically, i'm looking into CARP and > VRRP. > As i'm having a look at the CARP implementation, one question did arise: > Is there currently any reason to not have an implementation of VRRP > inside FreeBSD? > I understand that this made sense at a time due to CISCO patents, but > according to Wikipedia, it seems that those patents did expire some > years ago. > So, would there still be legal issues about this or is FreeBSD now free > to have its own VRRP implementation? >=20 > Regards, > Nicolas Masse. >=20 >=20