Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:19:14 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Paul <paul@gtcomm.net> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, "Wilkinson, Alex" <alex.wilkinson@dsto.defence.gov.au> Subject: Re: Multiple routing tables in action... Message-ID: <481766A2.7040809@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <48175B91.1010202@gtcomm.net> References: <48134DDE.9010306@elischer.org> <20080429084032.GW71371@stlux503.dsto.defence.gov.au> <48175793.30606@elischer.org> <48175B91.1010202@gtcomm.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paul wrote: > I've been waiting for something like this. Linux has done policy > routing for many many years and is very good at it. I prefer to use > FreeBSD for routing though and this is a feature I have been waiting for :) > Mainly to use with BGP , having multiple BGP routing tables. I would > like it to be similar to Cisco's VRF or Juniper's routing instance, but > maybe that's asking too much. We use it on our hardware routers for > implementations such as having multiple bgp route tables and having > customer bandwidth pricing change based on which routing table their > traffic gets , say.. value customers, premium customers, customers who > want only certain carriers in their bandwidth mix, etc. Would be fun > to have support for FBSD with quagga/openbgpd etc.. and be able to use > dscp for marking or any other policy based rule (source ip for instance). > > Thanks Julian.. This is a step forward in the right direction :) The interaction with routing daemons is something I don't know enough about. I need someone who knows routing daemons to tell how to correctly tweek code that sends routing events. I think it is possible that events from a particular FIB should only be reported to routing sockets that are associated with that FIB. but I'm not sure about this. This would mean running a separate instance of the routing daemon for each FIB (VRF?). Does this sound right to people? > > > Julian Elischer wrote: >> Wilkinson, Alex wrote: >>> 0n Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:44:30AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> >A little progress report >>> >From a recently installed (6.3) machine.... (plus patches) >>> >>> Ok, being ignorant to this, possibly a silly question: >>> >>> Why would i want or need multiple routing tables ? >> >> any time you wnat to base a route upon something other than just >> the destination address. It's basically called "Policy based >> routing". >> >> >> Trivial examples: >> You have two ISPs and you want to send all SMTP via one link and >> all other traffic via the other. >> >> You have 3 ISPs and want all traffic from the accounting department >> to go via a particular path (that is encrypted) but regular office >> chatter to go via another. >> >> I have other more complex examples in my work. >> >> I'm sure others have more solid examples as well. >> >> google for policy routing. >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?481766A2.7040809>