Hello

I have some suggestions about improving FreeBSD in some of the
areas/features. Let's discuss.

1. Cluster capability 

As I know, there is:
- Linux HA heartbeart in ports
- LVS (Linux Virtual Server for load balancing) for FreeBSD 5.3 in
http://dragon.linux-vs.org/~dragonfly/htm/lvs_freebsd.htm
- SunGrid in ports.

But looks like there is no native FreeBSD clustering/load balancing
tools to do it in 'a FreeBSD way'.

2. Networking support

As we know FreeBSD has a good history/reputation on networking.
FreeBSD lacks these support:

a) MPLS
For MPLS, Linux has project working since around in 2001.
It is called mpls-linux in Sourceforge.
There was a project to port Ayame to NetBSD 4.0 current, but I don't
know about the outcome.

b) NAT-T on IPSEC
I see NAT-T patch for FreeBSD 6 in 2005 but the patch not in
RELEASE/CURRENT.

As I know, there maybe patent infringement for NAT-T.
But I see NetBSD 3.0 (with warning) and Linux has NAT-T support out of
the box.
http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?ipsec++NetBSD-3.0

c) multiple default gateways
Looks like FreeBSD do not support metrics in 'route'.

3. Support LDAP SSO out of the box

Linux/Solaris/AIX have native LDAP SSO support.

I have asked about this feature before.
The problem is whether it should integrate OpenLDAP to base system.
BTW, I see ISC Bind, Sendmail and Amd automounter is in base.

4. LVM and file systems

As of FreeBSD 7.0, ZFS is ported.
This is great as FreeBSD do not have LVM in the past.
I am sure there is still room for improvement.
For example: ZFS/UFS shrink support, native file system journaling.

Regards
Patrick


      
____________________________________________________________________________________
No Cost - Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now. Sweet deal for Yahoo! 
users and friends. 
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text1.com
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to