From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 13 10:31:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA2616A4D1 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:31:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com (out3.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4820313C4DB for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:31:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15B47A74A; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:31:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:31:12 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: qb0Iwx3Ngb8xPOE3UtJXK2aFw+3dWIivno/+ftmfPfnL 1197541872 Received: from empiric.lon.incunabulum.net (82-35-112-254.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7045E29D42; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:31:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <476109EF.10808@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:31:11 +0000 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070928) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <476061FD.8050500@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <476061FD.8050500@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Net Subject: Re: bikeshed for all! X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:31:13 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > > I need a word to use to describe the network view one is currently on.. > e.g. if you are usinghe second routing table, you could say I've set > xxx to 1 > (0 based).. > > > current;y in my code I'm using 'universe' but I don't like that.. I would really really like it if we could stop using the term "routing" here. The kernel forwards, it does not route -- routing protocols route. I know that when BSD started out the distinction was not so clear, but it is in most modern implementations, Windows, IOS etc all draw a distinction between the currently winning routes used for forwarding, and the routes which are actually exchanged or learnt. So my vote is for "forwarding domain". I understand that this feature is something which swaps in a different forwarding table for the application one is currently running? And that it works in a manner similar to chroot() ? Is this different or the same as the pf/ipf/ipfw tag you mention? Also, can we retain compatibility with OpenBSD for now, for any equal-cost path stuff we do? Cheers... BMS