From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 23 14:53:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F44F16A47C for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:53:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from outsidefactor@iinet.net.au) Received: from mail-ihug.icp-qv1-irony3.iinet.net.au (ihug-mail.icp-qv1-irony3.iinet.net.au [203.59.1.197]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8873343D45 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:53:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from outsidefactor@iinet.net.au) Received: from 124-168-19-56.dyn.iinet.net.au (HELO SAURON) ([124.168.19.56]) by mail-ihug.icp-qv1-irony3.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 23 Jun 2006 22:53:18 +0800 Message-Id: <51n3a6$otinia@iinet-mail.icp-qv1-irony3.iinet.net.au> X-BrightmailFiltered: true X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-IronPort-AV: i="4.06,169,1149436800"; d="scan'208"; a="836329034:sNHT27533008" From: "Christopher Martin" To: "'Claudio Jeker'" Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 00:53:21 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <20060623142803.GG12611@diehard.n-r-g.com> Thread-Index: AcaW0UspELCuJVmnRBi9I7SF2mHLzwAAMGQg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2663 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Multiple routes to the same destination 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: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:53:26 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > On Behalf Of 'Claudio Jeker' > Sent: Saturday, 24 June 2006 12:29 AM > > Most implementation do a per source/dst IP address hashing which should > result in a similar distribution. > > OpenOSPFD will learn to cope with multipath routes in the next few weeks > but it will only work on OpenBSD. That's good news. Maybe I should take another look at OpenBSD, especially since the SMP support's a few years old now and pretty stable. > > Multipath setups are harder to debug as packets may flow differently. > Often it is easier to use a layer 2 trunk to aggregate links. It depends > on your network layout, etc. One place I am implementing OSPF in community wireless networks. We have a few sections of network that are very stable and have diverse paths. We currently have a lot of success with failover, but at times it seems a waste to have idle paths when others running in the same direction. Not that I wasn't expecting the difference in arrival time of packets not to effect performance in that scenario, but not to the extent you suggest. I guess we could stick with OpenWRT routers, but it would have been so nice to move in more BSD! > I hope that we can get more routing stuff done in the next few weeks but > the way routing is implemented in BSD makes it harder then necessary. > I bet andre@ will start to port features to FreeBSD as soon as the > stabilised in OpenBSD. I guess I will go and try it out on OpenBSD. If nothing else it's one more install being tested and making a more compelling argument to merge it into FreeBSD. I look forward to seeing what is on its way.