On Wed, 20 Apr 2016, Daniel Walton wrote:
the RFC on the intent of the RFC, etc. If you are not willing to say
"ok I disagree with the quagga community but I am going to accept this
patch anyway" then the reality is that it is your word no matter what.
Balls, sorry.
A patch was offered that just flipped long-standing behaviour over, and
*COMPLETELY DISABLED* the existing behaviour. Behaviour which is useful
enough that the OSPF WG is standardising this behaviour (with almost
similar interoperability risks).
I and Cumulus people, and OSPF WG people have worked together to try
understand the impact of the problem, and the options. And note the
issues are subtle enough that the stub-router RFC is actually wrong on
whether routing-loops are possible.
It turns out there is a path to standards conforming behaviour, which
will work with old Quagga, which can minimise interoperability issues
somewhat if we follow that path, minimise disruption to users (e.g.
avoid needless churn in churning behaviour around), with configuration
options so admins can cover the remaining cases. That path should also
allow the default to be switched in time.
I implemented that and sent it to the list, to supercede the earlier
one.
So yeah, I object to the earlier patch. But I think I've tried to do so
productively, and in line with precedent on previous behaviour-flipping
patches.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma [email protected] @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Every solution breeds new problems.
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
