Hey,
> you want per-packet overhead instead of deferring the overhead event
> based updates? network events tend to be much less frequent than
> sending/forwarding packets
Depending on performance cost and complexity cost of options.
--
++ytti
On 3/19/18 12:58 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Hey David,
>
>> The Linux stack does not flatten routes when inserting into the FIB.
>> Recursion is expected to be done a routing daemon such as bgp which will
>> be able to handle updates as the network changes.
>
> Are you saying that routing protocol wo
Hey David,
> The Linux stack does not flatten routes when inserting into the FIB.
> Recursion is expected to be done a routing daemon such as bgp which will
> be able to handle updates as the network changes.
Are you saying that routing protocol would observe the next-hop
change, then update the
On 3/19/18 1:42 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> I believe Linux does not support recursive static routes, is this correct?
The Linux stack does not flatten routes when inserting into the FIB.
Recursion is expected to be done a routing daemon such as bgp which will
be able to handle updates as the netw
I believe Linux does not support recursive static routes, is this correct?
If so, do we not see the use-case or is it just lacking quality
implementation which would be accepted if such is presented?
Just to elaborate on one use case. Consider your Linux host has two
BGP upstreams, you advertise
