Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*suggestion\s+for\s+routing\s+code\s+improvement\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*suggestion\s+for\s+routing\s+code\s+improvement\s*$/: 36 ]

Total 36 documents matching your query.

1. suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:51:12 -0400; Well, we're into a new experimental branch, so I figured the time had come to bring back an idea that didn't make it in a year ago. Currently, if you add custom routes and then down the device that t; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00025.html (9,236 bytes)
2. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 21:37:46 +0000 (GMT); Check this implementation of static routes (new version is coming soon...): http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/~julian/#routes The exact patches for static routes: http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/~; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00026.html (9,948 bytes)
3. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:53:47 +0200; I don't think it would be very hard. Internally device up/down state and the IP address lists and IP state are separated. The routes and addresses are currently removed triggered by the NETDEV_DOWN e; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00027.html (10,885 bytes)
4. suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:15:17 +0200; Hello! Why not leave the routing policy job to a routing daemon? There is risk of routing havoc if the kernel start acting as one. L-uu1:/# ip route list | wc -l 110441 This Linux box has 110441 bgp; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00028.html (9,547 bytes)
5. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: "Nivedita Singhvi" <nivedita@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:41:04 -0700; But is that the norm? Not all linux installations are large internet nodes..I'd say at least a significant minority of hosts typically have just a few static routes, not running a routing daemon, wh; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00029.html (9,244 bytes)
6. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 16:56:27 -0400; Because I've got static routes, and I know exactly what they are. The box(es) which inspired this sit on a private network, and once they are brought into service, the routes never change. However, t; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00030.html (10,480 bytes)
7. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 01:02:23 +0200; If we limit us to "static routes" for the other routes we must definitely leave to some with routing/topologi knowledge and we must not break systems with "routing daemons". If we look into the routi; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00031.html (10,955 bytes)
8. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 02:24:36 +0000 (GMT); include/linux/rtnetlink.h already contains the needed RTPROT_xxx definitions. The most used daemons don't use RTPROT_STATIC. The kernel does not know that the daemon registers static routes, they al; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00032.html (9,651 bytes)
9. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 13:29:40 +0200; Hello! 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 daemo; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00034.html (11,062 bytes)
10. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:08:23 +0300 (EEST); Well, I now see, it is used in gated. But only in one route table which is a drawback. Agreed. Add to this that sometimes many such agents play with the routes but in its own area (different tables,; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00037.html (11,044 bytes)
11. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 08:18:50 -0400 (EDT); 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 r; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00038.html (10,505 bytes)
12. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:01:03 +0200; gated netlink code came from Alexey. I had to adjust the preference for "static" in gated to get the desired effect. Well we can be happy for the well-designed routing/netlink system Linux got and a; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00040.html (10,439 bytes)
13. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:58:20 +0300 (EEST); Looking in the sources, main+default and after patching with one table more Last time I checked it 6 months ago and today I don't see much progress on the web site but you can be right :) It is not; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00041.html (10,804 bytes)
14. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:06:58 +0300 (EEST); Agreed. We are not trying to insert routing daemon into kernel :) If you use another hash function for the route cache you can even get better :) In my tests with many hosts i got 8% increase in per; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00042.html (9,601 bytes)
15. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 09:05:46 -0400 (EDT); hrm. Maybe its in their commercial version ;-< Note how slow they are in updating it these days. Someone approached me a while back with suggestions to join in forking (and liberate) Zebra from the c; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00043.html (10,195 bytes)
16. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:53:29 +0200; Interesting. At what rate of new connections/s did you test? Cheers . --ro; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00046.html (9,386 bytes)
17. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:24:51 +0300 (EEST); It was on 100mbit, I already don't remember the exact tests and number of clients, etc. The patch is archived ..., here it is. You can try it yourself: -- net/ipv4/route.c.orig Wed Jun 6 17:51:49 20; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00047.html (10,112 bytes)
18. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:05:19 +0200; Very intesting. Well seems like I don't get out of the lab until the snow comes.... We're testing GIGE switches now. With one Linux box with five e1000 we can put a background load of almost 5 Gbit/s; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00048.html (9,786 bytes)
19. suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:51:12 -0400; Well, we're into a new experimental branch, so I figured the time had come to bring back an idea that didn't make it in a year ago. Currently, if you add custom routes and then down the device that t; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00128.html (9,236 bytes)
20. Re: suggestion for routing code improvement (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 21:37:46 +0000 (GMT); Hello, Check this implementation of static routes (new version is coming soon...): http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/~julian/#routes The exact patches for static routes: http://www.linuxvirtualserver; /archives/netdev/2002-04/msg00129.html (10,018 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]