Claudio Jeker wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 05:14:52PM +0200, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Charles Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It's dead, I think: Cisco's lawyers started making predatory noises
about their "intellectual property". Some people from NetBSD are
working on a replacement called CARP, which you might want to check
out-- it seems that FreeBSD will be picking up support for this soon,
as well.
CARP comes from OpenBSD, not NetBSD, and is already in FreeBSD.
...and can't safely be deployed in a lot of datacenter scenarios where
the providers gear is running VRRP, since the OpenBSD-folks didn't bother
to read up on how the process of obtaining a protocol number works, and
hence used the one assigned to VRRP after a half-baked attempt at getting
one themselves. Hence making CARP pretty much useless for ISPs, no matter
how good it may or may not be otherwise.
This is not true. First of all the "OpenBSD-folks" asked IANA for protocol
numbers for CARP and pfsync but IANA denied it. The reason was that CARP
was not developped through an official standards organization.
Did this recently change since looking at /etc/protocols it does not
seem to be the case for most of them anyway?
Pete
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
