The default route into its own table is used for more complex setups
where you have different kinds of internet uplinks (e.g. the normal
one for your traffic, a VPN for mesh traffic)
We solved that particular problem in our network with source-specific
routing.
or where you don't want
to
Why not having a separate service which duplicates the routes you want
into the tables you want?
I think it's much cleaner to add filtering at the export stage. Something
like
export ip :: le 0 table 42
-- Juliusz
___
Babel-users mailing list
Yes,
copying the routes with a second service just to put some of them into
a different routing table sounds like a lot of unnecessary complexity.
Henning
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Why not having a separate service which
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Then we can have the following order of routing tables on routers:
babel
olsr
babel_default
olsr_default
Mitar,
I'll be glad to implement the hack that you require, but let's please
think whether
Hi!
I think that putting routes of both routing protocols in the same
table gets really messy and hard to debug. And prevents any policy
routing rules we might want to apply.
Mitar
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Then we can have the
5 matches
Mail list logo
