Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 10:56:12 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> To: paul@freebsd.org Cc: wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu, nate@sneezy.sri.com, jkh@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Paul Richards: sysconfig routed setting Message-ID: <199506291756.KAA11766@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199506291523.QAA13229@freebsd.netcraft.co.uk> from "Paul Richards" at Jun 29, 95 04:23:38 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
... > > We're getting off the point a bit though, which is whether routed should > be enabled by default. I still think the only time it should be run is > if the box has a real need to exchange RIP info with other routers and in > those cases the admin will know enough to make that decision. routed -q does _not_ ``exchange RIP info'' it simply listens for it, and I will repeat again, you really should listen to your local routers passively, there may very well be more than one! Defaultroute setups are prone to default router failure with no easy back up solution. Anyone with more than 1 segment _should_ run a routing protocol on there router(s), and have all clients listen to the(se) router(s). I have put this out 4 times now, and no one has even responded to this point :-(. I like it the way I have it here, I can install boxes up the wazo and never have to set a default or static route on a one of them, just let routed -q listen to my 2 routers and the new box knows what to do, no IP address to rember to set in defaultrouter, no worry if one of my routers gets kick knocked over when I am swinging sheetrock sheets around, every one will just start using the other router. This works for my FreeBSD boxes and for my HP/Apollo boxes, and should work for any box that supports routed -q. Most _larger_ networks have more than one router per segment for this very reason. > For most boxes it's not needed. Define _most_. It is _needed_ on every box I have here, I could go do it all with defaultroutes but then I would not have my fall over router do me one single bit of good :-(. It is _needed_ on every network I have ever set up, same reasons. Perhaps you folks are willing to live with router outages, I on the other hand find most of my clients quite willing to spend the extra few thousand dollars to have the highly reliable _and_ servicable dual router setups. [Gee, it is so nice to be able to take a router down to upgrade it without having to wait until 3am when _almost_ no one is using it] -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199506291756.KAA11766>