Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:24:33 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Lars Erik Gullerud <lerik@nolink.net> Cc: Claudio Jeker <cjeker@diehard.n-r-g.com> Subject: Re: FreeVRRPd project status Message-ID: <20050415102433.GE61665@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20050413212349.P22243@electra.nolink.net> References: <425196F0.4020309@x-trader.de> <6731347a839d85db456b1c5a33bcf0b5@mac.com> <20050413171132.B96104@electra.nolink.net> <20050413181931.GA16696@diehard.n-r-g.com> <20050413212349.P22243@electra.nolink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 09:36:48PM +0200, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote: L> My point is that this very unwise decision to reuse the VRRP protocol L> number, makes CARP mostly undeployable for ISP datacenter environments, L> and hence there is an obvious need for a working VRRP implementation, it L> doesn't help that CARP is now available in FreeBSD, because it is not a L> viable alternative in a lot of scenarios. If this is an issue for you, then you can make a trivial hack and use another protocol number on your installations. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050415102433.GE61665>