I'm thinking that if you need advanced features, go buy a Cisco/Juniper. But if you need basic (or even just homogenous) functionality, pfSense ought to be a good-enough platform. It's really close right now but not having redistribution is a roadblock, at least for me. -Adam
Mark Tinka <[email protected]> wrote: >On Sunday, September 15, 2013 07:35:27 PM Jim Pingle wrote: > >> I agree. From what I have done with Quagga on OSPF, it's >> been pretty straightforward and simple and tends to just >> work and work well. >> >> It isn't without its quirks, but I've never been sure if >> those are actually quirks in Quagga or the way we >> generate configurations for it. > >IS-IS in Quagga is very, very broken to the point of not >really being usable. > >We're an IS-IS shop in the backbone, but with Anycast DNS, >we've had to run OSPF on DNS servers with Quagga/Zebra, and >redistribute that into our IS-IS backbone. > >I don't know of any decent, non-router implementation of IS- >IS at the moment. Then again, corporate networks generally >depend on OSPF anyway. > >OSPFv3 isn't as feature-rich in Quagga as it is in routers, >but if you can do away with some of those features, it'll >work and inter-op. > >Mark. > >_______________________________________________ >List mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list _______________________________________________ List mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
