Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Jun 2020 12:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
From:      "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
To:        Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
Cc:        "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, "current@FreeBSD.org" <current@freebsd.org>, net <net@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: routed && route6d removal proposal
Message-ID:  <202006221926.05MJQJwC011867@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
In-Reply-To: <960ce7d8-f964-a686-dd79-242145b3ae5c@grosbein.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 22.06.2020 19:49, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> 
> > Whats unmaintained about code that has no need to change cause it just pretty much works?
> 
> Have you actually tried running routed(8) as base for real network with loops,
> mix of p2p and ethernet-like interfaces, IPv4 aliases, need of offset-lists and
> with diameter about 6 hops?

As I said I know of people that are running and it is working, and
Hiroko's post clearly establishes that as fact in evidence.

I am not even sure that RIP* has loop detection in the protocol,
as the prefered routing protocol for anything multipath (which
is what loops are in effect) is OSPF.

> 
> I'm not talking about RIPv2 inherent deficiencies.
> Our routed just glitches where quagga's ripd just works.

And your PR# for reporting the bug is?


-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes@freebsd.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202006221926.05MJQJwC011867>