> FreeVRRPd project is not dead, it's just a hosting problem,
> server that host www and cvs will be probably available tonight,
> I have found a new free hosting. I tried to send a patch for freebsd
> ports end 2004 for FreeVRRPd 0.8.8 without success,
> probably a resolving problem from me.
> As
Hello markus,
FreeVRRPd project is not dead, it's just a hosting problem, server that host
www and cvs will be probably available tonight, I have found a new free
hosting. I tried to send a patch for freebsd ports end 2004 for FreeVRRPd 0.8.8
without success, probably a resolving problem from m
On Friday 15 April 2005 19:38, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Guido van Rooij wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 02:21:40PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> >
> >Thanks. The carp page is much clearer after you updated it.
> >
> >I see you added cross references to carp in the ifconfig manpage.
> >I think tha
Guido van Rooij wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 02:21:40PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
Thanks. The carp page is much clearer after you updated it.
I see you added cross references to carp in the ifconfig manpage.
I think that should be enough (I'm not sure though what the correct way
is: pe
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 02:21:40PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> G>
> G> Just read the manpage and I have one question: the manpage does not sepcify
> G> the default advskew value, just that 100 is slightly larger.
> G> Furthermore, the advskew, pass and other ifconfig options are not
> G> (yet) d
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 09:36:48PM +0200, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
L> My point is that this very unwise decision to reuse the VRRP protocol
L> number, makes CARP mostly undeployable for ISP datacenter environments,
L> and hence there is an obvious need for a working VRRP implementation, it
L> d
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 02:58:08PM +0200, Guido van Rooij wrote:
G> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:43:01PM +0200, Max Laier wrote:
G> >
G> > Sorry, can't help with that, but if you don't need VRRP but a working
G> > redundancy setup, you should look at CARP which is part of 6-CURRENT and
G> > 5-STAB
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:43:17AM -0400, David Gilbert wrote:
> Lars> My point is that this very unwise decision to reuse the VRRP
> Lars> protocol number, makes CARP mostly undeployable for ISP
> Lars> datacenter environments, and hence there is an obvious need for
> Lars> a working VRRP implemen
> "Lars" == Lars Erik Gullerud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> My point is that this very unwise decision to reuse the VRRP
Lars> protocol number, makes CARP mostly undeployable for ISP
Lars> datacenter environments, and hence there is an obvious need for
Lars> a working VRRP implementation,
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 09:36:48PM +0200, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Claudio Jeker wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 05:14:52PM +0200, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
> >>
> >>...and can't safely be deployed in a lot of datacenter scenarios where
> >>the providers gear is running
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Claudio Jeker wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 05:14:52PM +0200, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
...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
Claudio Jeker wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 09:22:48PM +0300, Petri Helenius wrote:
Claudio Jeker wrote:
Did this recently change since looking at /etc/protocols it does not
seem to be the case for most of them anyway?
Most new protocols come from either some company, DARPA o
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 09:22:48PM +0300, Petri Helenius wrote:
> 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:
> >>>
>
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 N
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".
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--
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:43:01PM +0200, Max Laier wrote:
>
> Sorry, can't help with that, but if you don't need VRRP but a working
> redundancy setup, you should look at CARP which is part of 6-CURRENT and
> 5-STABLE since a couple of weeks and will be part of 5.4-RELEASE.
>
> http://www.Free
Julian Elischer wrote:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
"Mike Jakubik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Really? Ive never been able to compile it on any 5.x box.
[...]
bison -y -p wack -d config_gram.y
config_gram.y:91.10: parse error, unexpected ":", expecting ";" or "|"
config_gram.y:191.10: parse erro
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
"Mike Jakubik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Really? Ive never been able to compile it on any 5.x box.
[...]
bison -y -p wack -d config_gram.y
config_gram.y:91.10: parse error, unexpected ":", expecting ";" or "|"
config_gram.y:191.10: parse error, unexpected ":", expec
On Thu, April 7, 2005 11:12 am, Dag-Erling Smørgrav said:
> You're probably using the wrong version of bison.
Yes, Theo Schlossnagle already mentioned this to me. The compile process
was using the port version of bison, removing it solved the problem.
Thanks.
___
"Mike Jakubik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Really? Ive never been able to compile it on any 5.x box.
> [...]
> bison -y -p wack -d config_gram.y
> config_gram.y:91.10: parse error, unexpected ":", expecting ";" or "|"
> config_gram.y:191.10: parse error, unexpected ":", expecting ";" or "|"
> con
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 u
On Tue, April 5, 2005 10:46 pm, Theo Schlossnagle said:
> It isn't unmaintained... what makes you think it is unmaintained?
wackamole version 2.1.1 was released on July 28th, 2004 (08.31.2004).
> Compiles fine on my boxen. (4.11, 4-stable, 5.2.1, 5.3-RELEASE-p5)
Really? Ive never been able to c
On Apr 5, 2005, at 10:35 PM, Mike Jakubik wrote:
On Tue, April 5, 2005 10:23 pm, Theo Schlossnagle said:
On Apr 4, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Eivind Hestnes wrote:
If you are looking for a Open Source failover solution, CARP is
probably the best choice as it stands today.
If you need assistance with the con
On Tue, April 5, 2005 10:23 pm, Theo Schlossnagle said:
> On Apr 4, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Eivind Hestnes wrote:
>
>> If you are looking for a Open Source failover solution, CARP is
>> probably the best choice as it stands today.
>>
>> If you need assistance with the configuration, please reply to the
>
On Apr 4, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Eivind Hestnes wrote:
If you are looking for a Open Source failover solution, CARP is
probably
the best choice as it stands today.
If you need assistance with the configuration, please reply to the
list,
and I will try to respond.
While it requires a serious paradigm
Perhaps offtopic, but could be FYI:
I recently configured two FreeBSD 5.3 boxes (patched w/CARP support) to
act as one logic router (preemption) between multiple VLANs. The router
has now been in production for two weeks (under heavy load, too), and I
have not run into any problems what-so-ever. F
On Apr 4, 2005, at 3:35 PM, Markus Oestreicher wrote:
Does anyone know the current status of the FreeVRRPd project?
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 yo
On Monday 04 April 2005 21:35, Markus Oestreicher wrote:
> Good Day,
>
> Does anyone know the current status of the FreeVRRPd project?
>
> www.b0l.org and cvs.b0l.org seem to be dead.
>
> Has anyone checked out the last CVS version before it died?
Sorry, can't help with that, but if you don't need
Good Day,
Does anyone know the current status of the FreeVRRPd project?
www.b0l.org and cvs.b0l.org seem to be dead.
Has anyone checked out the last CVS version before it died?
Regards,
Markus
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.
30 matches
Mail list logo
