Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:09:00 +0300 From: "Mihai Serb" <miauris@gmail.com> To: "Li, Qing" <qing.li@bluecoat.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Multipath routing - failover version Message-ID: <1dd0a33d0804230209m2e1f81e0pe6cd5060134872a@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A438C8A6C@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com> References: <1dd0a33d0804160337o3090ac08g4a2cbc3be0d58b19@mail.gmail.com> <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A438C8A6C@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/16/08, Li, Qing <qing.li@bluecoat.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I recently incorporated multipath support into -CURRENT,
> for the upcoming 8.0. This patch originated from the KAME
> project and builds on the existing routing data structures
> and infrastructure. As a result I did not have to
> modify the userland programs, however, I think netstat
> can use some tweaking in its output.
>
>
The reason why I've made this patch is that I needed some sort of failover
and not load balancing. Corect me if I'm wrong but it seams that you've
added support for some sort of load balancing. Anyway, I will certainly take
a closer look at your work and maybe try to adjust it to my needs.
Hmm... in the current code if_unroute() would remove
> the interface route when the interface is down.
That is corect but it does not remove the ifp reference of a gateway route.
Mihai Serb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1dd0a33d0804230209m2e1f81e0pe6cd5060134872a>