Ondrej Zajicek <[email protected]> writes: > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 04:38:59PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> > I did not check 2/2 yet, but i think it should support both regular >> > ipv6 and ipv6 SADR channels/tables, not just the SADR ones. >> >> Hmm, well, my assumption was that since sadr tables can hold normal ipv6 >> routes as well, the pipe hack you were talking about would be sufficient >> to support both? > > It could, but that would be cumbersome for users that just want > regular routes. The pipe hack is more for setups that integrate SADR > routes from Babel with other (non-SADR) protocols. Simple setups > should keep simple configs.
What, we have to be nice to the users now? ;) Fair enough, I'll add support for both types of channels. Should it be possible to connect the same instance to both an ipv6 and and ipv6_sadr channel type, or is it OK to enforce that there's only one of those active? -Toke
