Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:19:51 -0600 From: Peter Schultz <pmes@bis.midco.net> To: "George V. Neville-Neil" <gnn@neville-neil.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBsd as internet router Message-ID: <778E3F3E-59B5-11D9-AB97-000D936BE398@bis.midco.net> In-Reply-To: <m2u0q5c1f9.wl@minion.local.neville-neil.com> References: <41D0FB74.2000901@ispworkshop.com> <41D1E3DA.4080704@cs.earlham.edu> <20041228225929.GA13275@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <m2u0q5c1f9.wl@minion.local.neville-neil.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 28, 2004, at 7:56 PM, George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
> At Tue, 28 Dec 2004 14:59:29 -0800,
> Brooks Davis wrote:
>>
>> [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
>> [cc'ing doc since I think this is really a doc issue. Please trim
>> your
>> reply list as needed]
>>
>
> Sorry to chime in late on this. I suspect the assertion about FreeBSD
> and building a router does have to do with complete RFC compliance.
> As Brooks pointed out, no router ever built actually complied with all
> the RFCs.
I got into FreeBSD starting with release 3.2, and I remember reading
and asking about this then. The answer I got was not as explanatory,
it was more like, "FreeBSD routing works great, get 'er done!" How
about changing it around to put FreeBSD in a more positive light:
FreeBSD is a highly reliable solution for your routing needs.
However, configured in this way, it does not completely comply
with the Internet standard requirements for routers. The fact is,
these same standards are not implemented by dedicated routing
hardware either, and not only that, but it would be unwise to
implement some of them.
Or something like that, so that people don't jump to the conclusion
that FreeBSD is behind the times or somehow inferior.
Cheers,
Pete...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?778E3F3E-59B5-11D9-AB97-000D936BE398>