Thanks Paul,
See below for some questions.
On 5/18/2016 8:06 AM, Paul Jakma wrote:
> Hi Lou,
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2016, Lou Berger wrote:
>
>> Paul, Lots of really interesting stuff here. Can you clarify the intent
>> of your mail? I read it as an intro to OpenSwitch use of quagga, until
>> the last paragraph which implies it is a submission -- but not in a
>> usable form.
> Yes, it's intended to introduce OpenSwitch and its architecture to the
> Quagga world, and outline the benefits of the architecture. As well as
> introduce the code, which works and is eminently usable. You can download
> OpenSwitch images for x86_64 and for a number of white-box L3 hardware
> switches (a lowish-cost developer switch is in the works too).
The 5512 is pretty cheap already...
> In terms of a patch submission, there is a patch against 0.99.24.1, which
> ports BGP and OSPFv2 over to this architecture. There is some cleaning up
> that could be done, and rebasing onto latest master, but it should already
> be reviewable to an extent.
I was really excited to start using this as soon as it was announced,
but I needed v6 and RIP (don't throw anything please) and neither are
supported. I was then *really* surprised to see the architecture was
moving away from zebra as the RIB manager. (see
http://git.openswitch.net/cgit/openswitch/ops-quagga/diff/zebra/DESIGN.md?id2=vendor&context=6&ignorews=1)
I'm not sure this the right design choice as integrating zebra
maintained ribs into OVSDB would have allowed any routing protocol to be
supported without per protocol changes. The internal state tracking and
management interface via OVSDB could still be done per protocol, but
without limiting use of the other protocols.
This all said, given that this is a conditionally compiled feature it
shouldn't break normal, non-ovsdb usage, or brake other new features
that have been raised over the last few years (the ones I care about are
VRFs&VPNS, MPLS, TE).
I think the main substantive question I'm left with is how does this
work align/coexist with cap'n proto work that was discussed a few months
ago. Any thoughts?
> I had different plans for getting this stuff upstream, but it seemed
> appropriate to post now on this.
Thanks for getting it started -- interesting stuff!
Lou
> regards,
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
