Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:44:05 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net route.h rtsock.c Message-ID: <20060316074405.GL1102@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <441883DD.B0B5A18C@freebsd.org> References: <200603151939.k2FJd91g080489@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060315204402.GK1102@FreeBSD.org> <441883DD.B0B5A18C@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 10:15:09PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: A> > A> These changes faciliate running of multiple cooperating routing A> > A> daemons at the same time without causing undesired interference. A> > A> Open[BGP|OSPF]D make use of these features to have IGP routes A> > A> override EGP ones. A> > A> > Please explain how is this done. Does radix allow presence of two A> > identical prefixes in tree, and we distinguish them by rt->rt_flags? A> A> No. If you've got the same prefix in BGP and OSPF with different next A> hops then the OSPF one should win. Normally the two daemons would get A> into a fight about this and indefinatly try to replace each others A> route again. This change makes it possible for two cooperating daemons A> to avoid this. With the change to flags OSPFD may take over an existing A> route by chaning the PROTO flag to itself. BGPD then knows it got an A> override. Before OSPFD had to delete the route and re-add it with its A> own parameters. However upon the delete message BGPD would try to add A> it again. When OSPFD removes a route that was identical to a BGP one A> BGPD will re-add its own version of it. So, we have a small window when the route is absent in kernel, right? -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060316074405.GL1102>