Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 12:51:34 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: My planned work on networking stack Message-ID: <20040302095134.GA24078@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040302092825.GD884@saboteur.dek.spc.org> References: <4043B6BA.B847F081@freebsd.org> <200403011507.52238.wes@softweyr.com> <20040302031625.GA4061@scylla.towardex.com> <20040302042957.GH3841@saboteur.dek.spc.org> <20040302082625.GE22985@cell.sick.ru> <20040302084321.GA21729@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040302085556.GA23734@cell.sick.ru> <20040302092825.GD884@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 09:28:25AM +0000, Bruce M Simpson wrote: B> However, not including an OSPF/BGP daemon doesn't preclude us from ensuring B> that APIs which are exposed for advanced routing functionality (multipath, B> etc) do the right thing across the board, are well defined, etc. Yes, this would be a good alternative. If FreeBSD routing API extends, and routing daemon's developers are notified about these extensions, then they will add support for these features. B> As to the second part of your mail: That sounds like a reasonable suggestion, B> I am sure Andre and others are paying attention to this and will take it on B> board when an implementation is nearer. If this is OK from you, I start working on it (second variant using sockaddr_aspath). I'm willing to see this feature, and I have a good testing conditions for it. Please, can you also comment Vladimir Grebenschikov's mail (he posted to -net only). -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040302095134.GA24078>