Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:31:46 +0000 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Qing Li <qingli@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Vadim Goncharov <vadim_nuclight@mail.ru>, arch@freebsd.org, Ivo Vachkov <ivo.vachkov@gmail.com>, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: resend: multiple routing table roadmap (format fix) Message-ID: <4780E652.5040804@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <47802137.8020701@elischer.org> References: <4772F123.5030303@elischer.org> <f85d6aa70712261728h331eadb8p205d350dc7fb7f4c@mail.gmail.com> <477416CC.4090906@elischer.org> <opt4c0imk24fjv08@nuclight.avtf.net> <477D2EF3.2060909@elischer.org> <opt4g4kcis17d6mn@nuclight.avtf.net> <47802137.8020701@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: >> >> OK, but we should think about it in the future. In theory, routing >> socket's messages are easily extendable with FIB number in uint16_t, >> as message keeps it's length... > > I will do that with the advice of people who know that protocol better > than I do. I'm afraid Linux is still ahead of the game here. They adopted a tag-length-value protocol called NETLINK which solves many of the problems inherent in PF_ROUTE. It even has an RFC. BMS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4780E652.5040804>