maybe ucarp ? http://www.ucarp.org/project/ucarp
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Alex Bligh <[email protected]> wrote: > Ondrej, > > --On 16 May 2011 21:59:56 +0200 Ondrej Zajicek <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> NSSA: >> This seems to be, surprisingly for me, the most requested >> feature, as it does not look hard to implement i will probably >> implement that in near future. > > Thanks > >> VRRP: >> Maybe. Is there any advantage if it is integrated in routing daemon >> (instead of using independent VRRP daemon)? I would guess that there >> isn't any interaction between VRRP and routing, but i don't have any >> experience with VRRP. > > We would be interested in a sane implementation of VRRP. We'd also > be even more interested in other interfaces redundancy protocols that > do not "waste" IP addresses (e.g. do not use IP addresses for the > native interfaces). One problem with VRRP is that it is allegedly > patent encumbered. > > -- > Alex Bligh > -- Thanx and regd's. Allan. http://www.in2dwok.com
