Stef Walter wrote:
I agree in principle with Mark that having future route messages might be able to let routing daemons differentiate between various fibs and manage them, and that this might be a feature.... However any implementation of that would likely break API and ABI, and very probably exist purely in FreeBSD 9.x.
Surely a good time for someone to act on the suggestion that we implement the Netlink socket family? It is a Tag-Length-Value protocol, so it can easily adapt to new additions.
It exists as an informational RFC, therefore it is not encumbered by the GPL; however it would need to be carefully implemented in FreeBSD.
It's who dares wins -- I wouldn't object to doing it, but I'm committed to doing other stuff for the moment.
_______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
