FIB separation

[Julian Elischer]

On 7/16/11 9:19 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hiroki Sato wrote:
>> Vlad Galu<dudu at dudu.ro>  wrote
>>    in<A718ADB2-EC52-462C-A114-85053F1B2E55 at dudu.ro>:
>>
>> du>  Hello,
>> du>
>> du>  A couple of years ago, Stef Walter proposed a patch[1] that enforced
>> du>  the scope of routing messages. The general consesus was that the best
>> du>  approach would be the OpenBSD way - transporting the FIB number in the
>> du>  message and letting the user applications filter out unwanted
>> du>  messages.
>> du>
>> du>  Are there any plans to tackle this before 9.0?
>>
>>   I am looking into this and investigating other possible extensions in
>>   rtsock messages such as addition of a fib member to rt_msghdr.  I am
>>   not sure it can be done before 9.0, though...
> Actually there were an off-list discussion with bz@ and julian@ about
> interface fibs and rtsock changes several weeks ago.
>
> Initial messages:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2011-June/029040.html
>
> I've got 3 different patches:
> 1) straight forwarded kern/134931 fix (no fib in rtsock, no breaking
> ABI, send to bz@)
just got back from vacation in hungary so catching up...:

Didn't he commit it?   bz??

> 2) adding fib in rtsock with rtsock versioning and other ABI keeping tricks
> 3) adding special RTA which can contain TLV pairs, with single defined
> TLV with routing socket
>
> As a result of discussion, first patch was sent to bz at . Since patches
> from kern/134931 are outdated attaching it here.