Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 18:01:47 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why routed and not gated by default? Message-ID: <19970604180147.WE10506@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <97Jun3.102350pdt.177489@crevenia.parc.xerox.com>; from Bill Fenner on Jun 3, 1997 10:23:49 -0800 References: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970603094344.10381D-100000@ice.cold.org> <97Jun3.102350pdt.177489@crevenia.parc.xerox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Bill Fenner wrote: > The two things that it's trivial to configure gated for are rip and > router discovery, which are the things that routed does just fine. GateD allows for a fine-grain setup of the routes you want/don't ever wanna see in your network, for the IP addresses you trust when receiving RIP announcements, for automatic setup of subnet routes out to a local part-time PPP link etc. Even in a RIP-only world, i prefer GateD for this. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970604180147.WE10506>