* Andrea Cocito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-04 13:02]: > Looking at the rationale behind that code I found interesting that it > does > something very similar to what we do here with a shell script: if the > main > router has one or more sessions down widthdraw its precedence on > CARP interfaces. > > Another difference is that I think CARP interfaces should be demoted > when bgpd is.. actually not running!
that is intended to be doen soon, but it needs a more generic solution. the whole carp group-based demotion is still very new. > Perhaps a per-peer config option like "promote <mask> <delta>" which > actually promotes the skew of interfaces matching <mask> of a value > <delta> would be more flexible (so one might boot with carp interfaces > at skew say 200 and promote them of 50 for each session which is up). demotion does not affect advskew. this would add unneeded knobs, adding confusion, solving basically nothing. > I see that most of the work done in porting openbgpd on FreeBSD is > quite non-intrusive, if you agree I might prepare a clean and non- > intrusive > pach that makes it a bit more platform independent without affecting > any feature on OpenBGPd (perhaps for who does not have interface > groups we might use masks, like "carp*") OpenBGPD is part of OpenBSD, other operating systems are of secodary interest. That said, we still try to code portable where possible. However, I keep explaining that turning a unix machine into a real BGP-speaking router requires more than just adding a userland BGP process. There are quite some kernel changes in the queue. Of course that leads to bgpd beeing tighter bound to OpenBSD - not much we can do about that. There'll likely always be a version running on $someotherOS, but it will always be behind the native version. The gap gets bigger, not smaller, over time. -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
