From owner-freebsd-isp Sat Aug 16 13:24:54 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA08908 for isp-outgoing; Sat, 16 Aug 1997 13:24:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net (jdd@avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net [194.207.2.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA08903 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 1997 13:24:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jdd@localhost) by avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net (8.8.2/8.7.3) id VAA22493; Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:24:38 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:24:38 +0100 (BST) From: Jim Dixon X-Sender: jdd@avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net To: Richard Hodges cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Multi-homed - Load Balancing - No Single Point of Failure In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Richard Hodges wrote: > Are you using the public version of gated (3.5.5?) or one of the > restricted ($$$) versions? 3.6a2 > Would it be a mistake to use gated 3.5.5 to BGP-peer with Cisco IOS? No. However, we did have a problem with gated crashing when passed some non-standard BGP4 options by Cisco routers. I don't recall the details, but it was fixed in a newish version. The fix is definitely in 3.6a2. > It looks like $12000 to get into the latest versions of gated. Would > it make sense for a number of interested parties to fund the membership > so that all can receive the binaries? For instance, if freebsd.org > were a "Small Service Member", that would give all organization members > access to the source code, right? And they could freely include the > binaries in the distributions... Or am I missing something? Just a > thought :-) Merit is trying to work out a formula for licensing gated cheaply to ISPs. If they get more requests, they will work harder. As I recall the contact is Susan Hares Email her about it. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015