On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Robert Olsson wrote:
> > There is already RTPROT_KERNEL and proto RTPROT_STATIC is way for the
> > administrator to interact with the routing daemon even if is a you say
> > that this is not currently implemented by all daemons. I have used this
> > with gated.
> Well, I now see, it is used in gated. But only in one route table
> which is a drawback.
I thought gated was capable of using at least main and local.
If i am not mistaken zebra is now capable of using more tables as well.
It would probably be actually better policy to enter all static routes in
Robert, when you enter a static route from gated, is it registered as
proto gated or proto static?
While i like Julians patch (adding no complexity, IMO) I see that the
functionality could be very easily moved outside the kernel where you
could also do a lot more fancy things (very complex decision making
example: based on which devs go down, what next multihops to use etc).
Unfortunately, it does require extra code in user space.
The question is: Would people who need this functionality be not very lazy
and actually fetch this code and compile it? ;->