bikeshed for all!
julian at elischer.org
Wed Dec 12 15:13:55 PST 2007
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> try using "instance".
> "Oh I'm going to use the FOO routing instance."
what do Juniper call it?
> Works nicely.
> * Julian Elischer <julian at elischer.org> [071212 14:34] wrote:
>> So, I'm playing with some multiple routing table support..
>> the first version is a minimal impact version with very limited
>> It's done that way so I can put it in RELENG_6/7 without breaking ABIs (I
>> Later there will be a more flexible version for-current.
>> Here's the question..
>> I need a word to use to describe the network view one is currently on..
>> e.g. if you are usinghe second routing table, you could say I've set xxx to
>> (0 based)..
>> current;y in my code I'm using 'universe' but I don't like that..
>> one could think of it as a routing plane..
>> each routing plane has he same interfaces on it but they are logically
>> treated differently becasue each plane has a different routing table.
>> so here's an axample of it in use now...
>> the names should change...
>> setuniverse 1 netstat -rn
>> [shows table 1]
>> setuniverse 2 route add 10.0.0.0/24 192.168.2.1
>> setuinverse 1 route add 10.0.0.0/24 192.168.3.1
>> setuniverse 2 route -n get 10.0.0.3
>> [shows 192.168.2.1]
>> setuniverse 1 route -n get 10.0.0.3
>> [shows 192.168.3.1]
>> setuniverse 2 start_apache
>> [appache starts, always using 192.168.2.1 to reach the 10.0.0 net.
>> also the syscall is setuniverse()
>> so, you see I really need a better name....
>> rtab? rtbl?
>> and the command should be called "????"
>> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-net