Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 15:43:24 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: multiple routing tables review patch ready for simple testing. Message-ID: <20080503154219.C47338@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <4816D1D2.7010603@elischer.org> References: <4816D1D2.7010603@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Julian Elischer wrote: Hi, > a kernel needs to be created with the option ROUTETABLES=N > > e.g. > +options ROUTETABLES=2 # max 16. 1 is back > compatible. > > leaving this out will result in just a single routing table as per normal. > > the max is 16 but I have an artificial (even lower) at 8 but that may > be gone by the time people try it :-) After reading through this thread and not looking at the patch again for the moment, where does this limit come from? Do you think this could be extended to more in the future? -- Bjoern A. Zeeb Stop bit received. Insert coin for new game.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080503154219.C47338>