Re: plans for multiple routing tables

mosaic wrote:
I would like to ask, whether there are any plans to implement multiple
route tables, like OpenBSD did:

http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/openbsd/2006-10/2665.html

Yup, we're aware of these changes.

[The feature you're referring to is actually the ability to have multiple choices for next-hops, not multiple routing tables -- that's just how the next-hops might conceptually be presented to the user.]

I'm well aware of fact that i can do policy routing via pf/ipf/ipfw as well of

http://imunes.tel.fer.hr/virtnet/

Again, not entirely the same thing. IMUNES is overkill for most people's requirements, and is about more than 'just' the forwarding plane; it is however a novel and interesting way of doing network simulation or virtualization.

There are a whole bunch of potential issues with implementing multipath right.

I would suggest, for now, that we just import the OpenBSD changes to the existing BSD FIB, as it is a relatively low change in terms of code.

I've responded to Julian off-list about his plans as a number of groups and individuals have been looking at this issue.

I would like to see this work out OK, but I do not have 'copious free time' in which to do this at the moment -- I gotta earn a living!

regards,
BMS
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"