Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 12:26:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, "current@FreeBSD.org" <current@freebsd.org>, net <net@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: routed && route6d removal proposal Message-ID: <202006221926.05MJQJwC011867@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <960ce7d8-f964-a686-dd79-242145b3ae5c@grosbein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 22.06.2020 19:49, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > Whats unmaintained about code that has no need to change cause it just pretty much works? > > Have you actually tried running routed(8) as base for real network with loops, > mix of p2p and ethernet-like interfaces, IPv4 aliases, need of offset-lists and > with diameter about 6 hops? As I said I know of people that are running and it is working, and Hiroko's post clearly establishes that as fact in evidence. I am not even sure that RIP* has loop detection in the protocol, as the prefered routing protocol for anything multipath (which is what loops are in effect) is OSPF. > > I'm not talking about RIPv2 inherent deficiencies. > Our routed just glitches where quagga's ripd just works. And your PR# for reporting the bug is? -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202006221926.05MJQJwC011867>