On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 01:09:41PM -0800, Dave Taht wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 12:47 PM Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote:
Christof Schulze <[email protected]> writes:
This is a public network where nodes can freely connect. We will have many VPN connections and babeld hopefully bring order in the resulting topology mess. What could possibly go wrong? :-)>>(why is there a 20 interface limit in kernel_netlink.c?), but > Why indeed? I am hoping to run babeld with >150 interfaces soonish. > Of course I can adjust the define but I'd rather have this limitation > understood than just fiddling with it.This is one of those design things I just don't understand. I assume that 148 of these are tunnels? Here I am having added two wireguard tunnels to my whole network, touching down on two different machines, and about to add two more between creaky pieces of the network over a backup link. I can hardly imagine wanting to deal with more complexity than that, I've already put myself into a loop twice....
In any case - 20 is not enough unless I am bridging. And that is not going to happen with that amount of interfaces.
viele Grüße Christof -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ against proprietary attachments
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
