Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 17:19:59 -1000 (HST) From: "David Langford" <langfod@dihelix.com> To: sweeting@tm.net.my Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Q] why not use routed ? Message-ID: <199703300319.RAA13942@caliban.dihelix.com> In-Reply-To: <v01540b06af63708ed58c@[202.184.153.110]> from "sweeting@tm.net.my" at "Mar 30, 97 01:33:43 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sweeting@tm.net.my >Just for completion and to satisfy my curiosity, does anyone >have any pointers to resources on routed, in particular : > >In addition to FreeBSD machines, we also have several AIX and Digital Unix >boxes and they all use routed. In the past I was warned against using >routed with FreeBSD.... and sure enough, turning it off in /etc/sysconfig cured >the problems that I was having at the time. >(The problems were regarding virtual domains for email ) > >Why is it that people here tend to advise against using routed ? > From what i understand, routed automatically sets up >the routing tables so it seems better than specifying static routes. >(although with each of my FreeBSD boxes connected directly to the central >router, I suppose there is only one route to add for each machine and >it is unlikely to change.) The biggest problem with routed is that it acts very stupid. Your best bet is to have a smart default router and point your hosts to it. If you have multi-homes host use gated. It is easily configurable to whatever you need (or dont need). You can have your multi-homed host running gated ONLY send routing information to your smart default router. One of the biggest problems is if I have multiple routers on a network the other hosts running "routed -q" will arbitrarily" lose the default routes. This is very annoying. -David Langford langfod@dihelix.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703300319.RAA13942>