Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 09:28:25 +0000 From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: My planned work on networking stack Message-ID: <20040302092825.GD884@saboteur.dek.spc.org> In-Reply-To: <20040302085556.GA23734@cell.sick.ru> References: <4043B6BA.B847F081@freebsd.org> <200403011507.52238.wes@softweyr.com> <20040302031625.GA4061@scylla.towardex.com> <20040302042957.GH3841@saboteur.dek.spc.org> <20040302082625.GE22985@cell.sick.ru> <20040302084321.GA21729@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040302085556.GA23734@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 11:55:56AM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Read on my previous mail pls. I'm speaking of some changes that require > altering both FreeBSD and routing daemon. Currently I'm thinking of AS path > only, but in future some other issues can appear. Routing daemon should be close > to operating system it is running on. FreeBSD has RIP routing daemon - routed, but > no OSPF/BGP one. I think OSPF and BGP are much more used nowadays, than RIP. That may be so, but it would be unreasonable to force Quagga/Zebra on all users and add them to the cost of maintaining the base system as it stands; especially so given that there are other alternatives out there (MRTD, for example, gated, and XORP...). routed we support largely out of nostalgia, I guess. I wouldn't mind seeing it retired to ports eventually, but there are still people out there running RIP on their networks (I'm one of them, and before anyone shoots me, it's purely an equipment limitation -- the rest of my network runs OSPF and BGP). However, not including an OSPF/BGP daemon doesn't preclude us from ensuring that APIs which are exposed for advanced routing functionality (multipath, etc) do the right thing across the board, are well defined, etc. As to the second part of your mail: That sounds like a reasonable suggestion, I am sure Andre and others are paying attention to this and will take it on board when an implementation is nearer. BMS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040302092825.GD884>