Dave+Seddon wrote: > > Greetings, > > Itâs very cool to hear you guys are interested in separate routing. > > > Having multiple stacks duplicates a lot of structures for each stack > > which don't have to be duplicated. With your approach you need a new > > jail for every new stack. In each jail you have to run a new instance > > of a routing daemon (if you do routing). And it precludes having one > > routing daemon managing multiple routing tables. While removing one > > limitation you create some new ones in addition to the complexity. > > Running multiple routing daemons isnât too much of a problem though. The > memory size isnât usually very high, and it is more likely to be secure if
It depends on your goals. If you have full BGP feeds then running multiple routing daemons is a big problem. Especially with Quagga's RIB+protocolRIB design. Five times 130MB of RAM ain't nice. > the daemons are separate. If somebody was going to run a large instance of > routing they should probably use a router, not a unix box. Bzzt, wrong answer. There is no difference between a FreeBSD box and a "router" per you definition, see Juniper. The only thing they've got is a hardware FIB and forwarding plane. I don't want to run Cisco et al. because I can't change anything other than what the IOS cli gives me. I'm not satisfied. I can't run my own experimental routing protocols on it. I can't fix any of their (plenty) bugs. Nono, you want to use FreeBSD as router instead of Cisco, Juniper or all the others. -- Andre _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
