Hello sven, it's not a routing table problem, it's only a modification on route priorities, it's not the same thing. Here is my example at work:
I have BGP on the WAN, OSPF for my LAN (+ over GRE tunnels) and RIP to my CISCO catalyst 45XX. The problem is simple. I have two routers in this configuration. OSPF is prior on RIP. routes obtained by RIP are redistributed on OSPF (because my remote sites must know them). But OSPF is prior than RIP and then the two border routers want to pass by the other instead of using the RIP route. I have the same problem with BGP. default route is prior on OSPF than BGP. Then BGP must be prior on OSPF to don't loop default route between the two routers. -- Best regards, Loïc BLOT, UNIX systems, security and network engineer http://www.unix-experience.fr Le vendredi 01 novembre 2013 à 19:57 -0400, sven falempin a écrit : > FreeBSD propose to have a specific routing table for a process, which is > even more powerful. > When the router has multiple gateway i guess when a source address is > choose the route should be chosen given that. Nothing more. > > What use of this <<improvement>> do you imagine ?, of course you may want > this traffic over this network(low latency) and the other one on > another(high badnwith), put you may use pf for this, or specific route for > the services. > > Writing about this make me think you want a route that <select> on the PORT > instead of the IP. Is this madness ??? > > <<route add smtp 1.2.3.4>> > > > > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Loïc BLOT <loic.b...@unix-experience.fr>wrote: > > > Hello @tech > > Congratulations for the 5.4 release. > > > > I want to explain a draft to improve a little routing administration on > > OpenBSD, maybe for 5.5. > > > > There is a lack on routing daemon, the possibility to change routing > > priorities for some protocols. > > At this time routing priority is a dedicated constant in the kernel. > > In some cases it's useful to change routing priority for a protocol to > > make it prior on another. > > > > To resolve this lack, two ways are possible: > > > > 1. Each routing daemon manage it's own priority itself, instead of using > > kernel priorities, and limits the minimum and maximum value. When we > > change the priority (for example bgpctl routing priority 10) all > > priorities. > > This is easy but a problem appears: the priority can be same as another > > running daemon (ospfd for example). How can we know other routing > > priorities ? > > > > 2. We need to change the utility of routing priority value in the > > messages to another thing: routing type. > > Then when a daemon register a route, he register route for its type > > (BGP/OSPF/RIP/MPLS) and the kernel apply a variable value. > > This value could be modified by sysctl (example sysctl -w > > net.routing.ospf_priority = 10) > > When we change the priority for a protocol, kernel will search all > > routes matching the protocol and apply the priority. Priority conflicts > > must be detected by the kernel. > > > > Do you know it's possible ? Is this interesting for future OpenBSD ? > > > > If OpenBSD team is interest i can start a patch in next weeks. > > > > Thanks for reading > > -- > > Best regards, > > Loïc BLOT, > > UNIX systems, security and network engineer > > http://www.unix-experience.fr > > > > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
