Sounds good to me.  We don't need a RIP daemon in base, and if needed,
it is just a pkg install away via one of the myrriad maintained
routing daemons.

Thanks,
Conrad

On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 4:06 PM Alexander V. Chernikov
<melif...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> I would like to propose removal of  sbin/routed and usr.sbin/route6d.
>
> routed(8) is the daemon implementing RIPv2 routing protocol.
> route6d(8) is the daemon implementing RIPng routing protocol for IPv6.
>
> RIP [1] was one of the first  protocols used in the networking. The first 
> version was implemented back in 1982.
>
> 1. Network landscape has changed since then. BGP, OSPF, IS-ISIS and other 
> routing protocols have been created and greatly improved over years. People 
> have created and adopted numerous designs leveraging OSPF/ISIS or BGP.
> RIP became obsolete a while ago as there were no competitive advantage it can 
> offer.
> "It is the oldest routing protocol used by the network industry and is 
> considered by many to be inefficient or border-line obsolete." — [2], 2009
> "Today, the only reason you might run across a network running RIPv2 is 
> either that the network is very old and in serious need of an upgrade or the 
> network is running cheaper, consumer-grade routing hardware that can only 
> support RIP" — [3], 2016.
>
> 1.1. Nowadays the daemon name is simply misleading. Given situation described 
> above, one does expect far wider functionality from the program named 
> "route[6]d" than just  RIP implementation.
>
> 2. Multiple routing stacks supporting all major routing protocol including 
> RIP exists these days: bird, frr, quagga. Many BGP-only designs in are 
> gaining popularity, so do bgp speakers such as exabgp or gobgp.  Nowadays, if 
> one needs dynamic routing on the host, OSPF or BGP speaker is the choice. 
> FreeBSD packages contains well-maintained ports for these. Having RIP[ng] 
> speakers in base offers no advantage.
>
> 3. Both routed/route6d are largely unmaintained [4] and presents an 
> additional attack vector. Here is the list of last non-trivial commits to 
> routed/route6d:
>
> sbin/routed:
> r327276 - coverity
> r317035 - rtsock fix
> r299825 - coverity
> r299822 - coverity, from netbsd
> r299821 - coverity, from netbsd
> r299784 - coverity, from netbsd
> r299771 - coverify, from netbsd
> r286347 - bugfix
> r276602 - SA14:21 patch
> r271919 - SA14:21 fix
> r215702 - logic fix, 2010
>
> usr.sbin/route6d:
> r337500 - functional fix, 2018
> r317035 - rtsock fix
> r311994 - coverity
> r311985 - coverity
> r299869 - coverity
> r299491 - coverity
> r270234 - link-local fix
> r243233 - functionality improvement, 2012
>
> To summarise: RIP protocol is obsolete, implementations for newer protocols 
> exists in ports,  implementation in base  is unmaintained.
>
> With all that in mind I propose to remove routed and route6d from base in 
> FreeBSD 13.
> Timeline:
> June 5 - feedback aggregation and decision point
> July 19 - removal (proposed)
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routing_Information_Protocol
> [2] 
> https://www.globalknowledge.com/ca-en/resources/resource-library/articles/basics-of-understanding-rip/
> [3] 
> https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-centers/comparing-dynamic-routing-protocols
> [4] 
> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=runnamed&list_id=361897&namedcmd=routed_prs
>
> /Alexander
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to