I see some emails from March of 2008 discussing some initial work on a 2.6
branch of Leaf. Can anyone tell me what came of that?
I found a scenario where a 2.6 branch is necessary. I'm trying to do
multi-ISP & traffic control on the same box, and because Shorewall requires
some 2.6 features to
Call me stupid, but I am running a cascade of two Leaf routers and I
would not even start to consider joining them. That said, I have been
running them on the same host lately (VMware). That is because I've run
out of old small sized boxes and everything I can get my hands on is
hugely oversize
Gordon
Gordon Bos wrote:
> Call me stupid, but I am running a cascade of two Leaf routers and I
> would not even start to consider joining them. That said, I have been
> running them on the same host lately (VMware). That is because I've run
> out of old small sized boxes and everything I can g
Erich Titl wrote:
> Gordon
>
> Gordon Bos wrote:
>> Call me stupid, but I am running a cascade of two Leaf routers and I
>> would not even start to consider joining them. That said, I have been
>> running them on the same host lately (VMware). That is because I've run
>> out of old small size
Gordon
Gordon Bos wrote:
>
> Erich Titl wrote:
>> Gordon
>>
>> Gordon Bos wrote:
>>> Call me stupid, but I am running a cascade of two Leaf routers and I
>>> would not even start to consider joining them. That said, I have been
>>> running them on the same host lately (VMware). That is because
Erich,
Call me stupid, but I am running a cascade of two Leaf routers and I
would not even start to consider joining them. That said, I have been
running them on the same host lately (VMware). That is because I've run
out of old small sized boxes and everything I can get my h
Gordon,
> Call me stupid
Never! I'm relieved to hear that this proposed solution is running at least
one other place.
I had Leaf running on VMWare for a long time, but I moved it off of it not
because of performance issues, of which there were none, but only because I
didn't want to lose intern
Hi Bob
Robert K Coffman Jr. -Info From Data Corp. wrote:
> I see some emails from March of 2008 discussing some initial work on a 2.6
> branch of Leaf. Can anyone tell me what came of that?
>
> I found a scenario where a 2.6 branch is necessary. I'm trying to do
> multi-ISP & traffic control
>> I'm considering chaining two Leaf Routers together, one to handle the
>> multiple ISPs and one for TC as a temporary solution,
>How does this solve the 2.6 requirement?
Erich,
The basic issue is I can't use HIGH_ROUTE_MARKS=Yes in Shorewall. As a
result, I can't do both Multi-ISP and Traff
Robert K Coffman Jr. -Info From Data Corp. wrote:
>>> I'm considering chaining two Leaf Routers together, one to handle the
>>> multiple ISPs and one for TC as a temporary solution,
>>>
>
> >How does this solve the 2.6 requirement?
>
> Erich,
>
> The basic issue is I can't use HIGH_ROUTE_M
Hi Robert,
> I see some emails from March of 2008 discussing some initial work on a 2.6
> branch of Leaf. Can anyone tell me what came of that?
The status of that branch is the same as in March 2008 - apart from a
few updated packages (with were updated when the packages for the Bering
uClibc
11 matches
Mail list logo
