On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 09:34:04AM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote: > On Fri, 29 May 2015, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > > multiple VRFs but can also be run as multiple processes would make > > everyone happy, although it does mean there are two ways of running > > things that would have to be supported in the code. > > My worry is more whether the two approaches be supported sensibly at /all/ > together? In particular, the end user UI and experience. > > I'd prefer we think about that now, up-front, and work out what it should > look like. It could be some small changes to single-for-all now would make > things much easier in the future. We'd need to see the patch-set for one > or two protocol daemons first though to be able to properly think about > that, I think. > > Upfront design is a good thing. Post-hoc design less so.
Upfront was half a year ago... and we have users that would like to start meshing with this. [http://patchwork.quagga.net/patch/952/] -David _______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list Quagga-dev@lists.quagga.net https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
