This is a discussion on Re: Multiple routing table support commited - FreeBSD ; Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > Julian, > > Thanks so much for this. > > Julian Elischer wrote: >> I have committed the base of teh Multi-routing-table support. >> I am current;y waiting for it to loop back to me ...
Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Thanks so much for this.
> Julian Elischer wrote:
>> I have committed the base of teh Multi-routing-table support.
>> I am current;y waiting for it to loop back to me before a final
>> make universe test, but I think it should be ok.
>> if you do nothing you should not see any difference.
> I think you well deserve a break after all that effort. I look forward
> to p4 merge >;->
> [I waded into the pf code last week, to write a patch to allow IP Router
> Alert out by default -- as it breaks IGMP/MLD and thus link-scope/all
> It looks like it wouldn't be too difficult for someone to add a "setfib"
> tag, however, this can break backwards compatibility with pfsync'ed
> nodes if pfstate/pfrule are changed.]
max laire did some of this already... check the pf files now.
there should already be some fib support..
look at teh pre commit diff at:
the pf changes are right at the top.
I will admit that I haven't tested the pf changes, as they are
max's work but as its a "New" feature in freeBSD it can't hurt
any existing setups and I did confirm that the certainly don't break
any other code.
>> This code, backported to 6.3 is running on Ironport appliances
>> and Cisco/Ironport has graciously allowed it to be given back.
> Thanks also to them for making this possible.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "firstname.lastname@example.org"