On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:44:55AM -0400, Ed Maste wrote: > On 28 June 2012 23:15, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > The route-table implementation is definitely not portable, but I don't > > think there's anything in the interface that can't be implemented in > > FreeBSD. One proper solution, then, would be to add an implementation > > that works in FreeBSD. I'd certainly take such an implementation. > > It looks like the public interfaces in route-table (other than glue) > are just route_table_get_ifindex and route_table_get_name, which > should be straightforward to implement for FreeBSD. I will take a > look at this - probably implementing route-table-bsd.[ch].
Yes, that's right. The other "extern" functions in that file are really just hooks to allow the code to do work and wake up, if necessary (the "run" and "wait" function) and hints to let it know whether it should bother keeping track of changes, if the implementation actually needs that (the "register" and "unregister" functions). > It looks like route-table is implemented only for IPv4 right now? If > it does go away perhaps that will save the effort of creating a v6 > interface. If Ethan tells us his plan, then maybe we can just execute that instead of implementing for BSD. Ceteris paribus, I agree that it's better to delete code than to add more of it! _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
