Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:52:30 +0200 From: Andrew Degtiariov <ad@astral-on.net> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: My planned work on networking stack Message-ID: <20040302135230.GF3438@astral-on.net> In-Reply-To: <p06002016bc6a3d9b6c9c@[10.0.1.3]> 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> <20040302090219.GC3438@astral-on.net> <p06002016bc6a3d9b6c9c@[10.0.1.3]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 02:36:50PM +0100, Brad Knowles wrote: > At 11:02 AM +0200 2004/03/02, Andrew Degtiariov wrote: > > > What's difference (*currently*) beetwen FreeBSD+Zebra and Cisco routers? > > Support for VRRP? Support for various other routing protocols > not covered by zebra/quagga -- at least not yet, if ever? Support > for line cards and other devices that do not exist in a format you > can plug into a PC? > > Maybe there's nothing you can do about this last item, but > there's plenty that can be done on the software side -- just take a > look at all the protocols that have been identified as being > desirable, but not yet implemented by zebra/quagga. > > > Oh, and then there are all the operational issues where > zebra/quagga can't keep sessions going when a neighbor flaps, etc.... > Those would require re-architecting the whole routing system, at ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Congratulation. That's namely what the conversation was about. > which point it might make a lot more sense to go with a different > implementation -- such as bgpd from OpenBSD. -- Andrew Degtiariov DA-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040302135230.GF3438>