cvsup, mirrors and data integrity
infofarmer at gmail.com
Sat Oct 22 14:35:21 PDT 2005
On 10/23/05, Dimitar Vasilev <dimitar.vassilev at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I guess that's why we let cisco handle bgp (and ntp,
> > by the way).
> Thanks, I will have it in mind next time if I'm to setup these two services.
> The bottleneck is insufficient memory for BGP. In a week or so there
> will be another chip.
> BTW, the network admins of the institution, where the project machine
> I coadmin is collocated, do not like T*tsco, because it is
> exploitable and breaks easily under the volume of traffic passing
> through there.I agree with them to some extend.
> As the project is fully voluntary and it is backed by the admins and
> FreeBSD users, it is normal to have such a setup. I'm now used to the
> signs of dying ntpd and can react in acceptable time.
> Happy weekend!
> Димитър Василев
> Dimitar Vassilev
> GnuPG key ID: 0x4B8DB525
> Keyserver: pgp.mit.edu
> Key fingerprint: D88A 3B92 DED5 917E 341E D62F 8C51 5FC4 4B8D B525
Yeah, Cisco sucks - in that I totally agree with you.
Haven't tried bgp on FreeBSD, but I'm sure the ntpd
problem can be alleviated by daily something like
"/etc/rc.d/ntpd stop && /etc/rc.d/ntpdate start &&
/etc/rc.d/ntpd start", can't it.
More information about the freebsd-questions