From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 16 21:36:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7637E16A4DA for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:36:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yb@bashibuzuk.net) Received: from a.6f2.net (a.6f2.net [213.189.5.89]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1852643D46 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:36:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yb@bashibuzuk.net) Received: by a.6f2.net (Postfix, from userid 66) id A78FFBF8D2A; Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:36:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cc.bashibuzuk.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0BB16BD79; Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:37:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:37:36 +0200 From: Yann Berthier To: David Gilbert Message-ID: <20060816213736.GB1641@bashibuzuk.net> References: <17634.24534.923726.9912@canoe.dclg.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17634.24534.923726.9912@canoe.dclg.ca> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: openospfd X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:36:39 -0000 Hello, On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, at 19:59, David Gilbert wrote: > Is there anyone actively working on openospfd (the port)? > > There are systemic things like the fact they want to ignore lo0 > destined routes (although I know how to patch that), but there are > less obvious things that I havn't figured out. > > Like the fact that our version ignores if_tun and if_gre. This might > be fixed in openbsd code, but it seems at least a little non-trivial > to make the newer code work here. I asked (privately) the same question some weeks ago - as newer openospf snapshots make use of route labels, i was told that input was needed from some committers heavily involved in the network stack. The question is still open: pf, openbgp and now openospf use route labels, is it a feature worth being ported to FreeBSD ? (no, not by me). I even remember an olllld post by glebius@ where he talked about using route labels to store AS info for ng_netflow I ended up taking a snapshot of openospf at that time and removing all route labels reference to compile it. It was running fine, except that we decided to go for static routes due to routes through an interface deleted as it should upon a link down event, but not reinstalled upon a following link up, with the routing table still insisting on using another interface when the directly connected one was now available. Certainly ? it was my hack's fault being too intrusive, but we where not comfortable with this situation ... Not too much of a problem for the number of routes considered in this part of the infrastructure but still ... regards, - yann