Re: BGP in a containers
So I have to ask, why is it advantageous to put this in a container rather than just run it directly on the container's host? Mike On 06/14/2018 05:03 PM, Richard Hicks wrote: I'm happy with GoBGP in a docker container for my BGP Dashboard/LookingGlass project. https://github.com/rhicks/bgp-dashboard Its just piping RIB updates, as JSON, to script to feed into MongoDB container. At work we also looked at GoBGP as a route-server for a small IXP type of setup, but ran into few issues that we didn't have the time to fully debug. So we switched to BIRD for that project. We are happy with both. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 11:56 AM, james jones wrote: I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? -James
Re: BGP in a containers
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:41 PM Oliver O'Boyle wrote: > There's no reason why it shouldn't work well. It's just a minor paradigm > shift that requires some solid testing and knowhow on the ops team. > > and... XR or Junos are ... doing this under the covers for you anyway, so.. get used to the new paradigem!
Re: BGP in a containers
There's no reason why it shouldn't work well. It's just a minor paradigm shift that requires some solid testing and knowhow on the ops team. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 22:26 Eric Tykwinski, wrote: > The funny part is I don’t like containers but love VMs, so kvm, vmware, > citrix, hvm, et al. > Not much difference but I tend to like the separation of OS knowledge, > with all the bugs lately though I wonder if it’s worth it. > > Sincerely, > > Eric Tykwinski > TrueNet, Inc. > P: 610-429-8300 > > > On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:14 PM, Hunter Fuller > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:46 PM Mike Hammett wrote: > > > >> I wonder which part of the proposal people find offensive. > > > > > > I have no idea. All - You know no one is trying to make *you* run BGP > > inside of a container, right? > >
Re: BGP in a containers
The funny part is I don’t like containers but love VMs, so kvm, vmware, citrix, hvm, et al. Not much difference but I tend to like the separation of OS knowledge, with all the bugs lately though I wonder if it’s worth it. Sincerely, Eric Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300 > On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:14 PM, Hunter Fuller wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:46 PM Mike Hammett wrote: > >> I wonder which part of the proposal people find offensive. > > > I have no idea. All - You know no one is trying to make *you* run BGP > inside of a container, right?
Re: BGP in a containers
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:46 PM Mike Hammett wrote: > I wonder which part of the proposal people find offensive. I have no idea. All - You know no one is trying to make *you* run BGP inside of a container, right?
Re: BGP in a containers
I wonder which part of the proposal people find offensive. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "james jones" To: "NANOG" Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 1:56:09 PM Subject: BGP in a containers I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? -James
Re: BGP in a containers
I'm happy with GoBGP in a docker container for my BGP Dashboard/LookingGlass project. https://github.com/rhicks/bgp-dashboard Its just piping RIB updates, as JSON, to script to feed into MongoDB container. At work we also looked at GoBGP as a route-server for a small IXP type of setup, but ran into few issues that we didn't have the time to fully debug. So we switched to BIRD for that project. We are happy with both. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 11:56 AM, james jones wrote: > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? > > -James >
Re: fd.io vs cumulus vs snabb vs OVS vs OpenNSL
On Thu 2018-Jun-14 23:28:50 +0200, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote: Bof I currently use cumulus's software, I will then report my experience: not production ready You have a lot of features, with a fast development, but .. I expect my network to be a rock solid part of my infrastructure, especially when I am using the classic part, not the fancy ones When I have huge stability issue with something like bgp, what can I say but "get away from those software, it is not production-ready yet" ? I'd be curious about specifics. We've got some Cumulus with BGP and it hasn't given us any issues. Granted, it's very vanilla with a couple of SVIs per switch and just basic IPv4 unicast and it's just a management network, but it hasn't caused us any issues that I'm aware of. -- Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: fd.io vs cumulus vs snabb vs OVS vs OpenNSL
Bof I currently use cumulus's software, I will then report my experience: not production ready You have a lot of features, with a fast development, but .. I expect my network to be a rock solid part of my infrastructure, especially when I am using the classic part, not the fancy ones When I have huge stability issue with something like bgp, what can I say but "get away from those software, it is not production-ready yet" ? On 06/14/2018 04:18 PM, Marcus Leske wrote: > Hi > > Any thought leader on the list to shed some light to what is happening > in the world of open networking ? OVS vs OpenNSL vs Cumulus vs fd.io > vs Snabb vs a lot of stuff :) > > Where is this going ? What are the obvious pros and cons of each when > it comes to scale and feature velocity ? > > https://www.reddit.com/r/networking/comments/8r0afq/is_their_any_truth_to_the_trend_of_putting/ > > Danke >
Google Scholar Contact?
Hey, Can someone reach out to me off list in regards to Google Scholar? Been dealing with an issue in which a recently acquired IP block appears to have been blacklisted in the past and is impacting end users. Thanks! -- Ryan Gard
Re: FWIW... Re: TEST Help? TEST
Also, please stop putting quotes in your email signature... it's 2018. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On June 13, 2018 2:01 AM, wrote: > Then perhaps that thread was killed by the moderators. Please heed > > the list charter. > > Also, please get a mail client that generates proper In-Reply-To > > headers and knows how to quote... it's 2018. > > -- Niels. > > > > > "It's amazing what people will do to get their name on the internet, > > which is odd, because all you really need is a Blogspot account." > > -- roy edroso, alicublog.blogspot.com
RE: What are people using for IPAM these days?
>On 6/12/18 1:52 PM, Chris Adams wrote: >> Once upon a time, Randy Bush said: If you start with Excel, down Will It Scale Road, you will be sorry, so very sorry. Especially when it comes to v6. >>> >>> emacs! >> >> vim! >> > >ed! Butterflies!
fd.io vs cumulus vs snabb vs OVS vs OpenNSL
Hi Any thought leader on the list to shed some light to what is happening in the world of open networking ? OVS vs OpenNSL vs Cumulus vs fd.io vs Snabb vs a lot of stuff :) Where is this going ? What are the obvious pros and cons of each when it comes to scale and feature velocity ? https://www.reddit.com/r/networking/comments/8r0afq/is_their_any_truth_to_the_trend_of_putting/ Danke
FWIW... Re: TEST Help? TEST
On 06/12/2018 01:10 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: Apologies for the noise. Please hit delete... Once again I am not able to send email to the list and have either been moderated off again (for some mistake or some unknown reason why) or something else is going on. Sent email to admins@, but no response, so this is just a test to see if anything gets through. FWIW this is what I've seen, by date/time... - John
Re: BGP in a containers
I run BGP (bird) on containers in a high available production environment for supporting multiple kubernetes clusters, among other very critical pieces of my infrastructure. As long as you know what you’re doing and have people that knows how to troubleshoot, it's very reliable. the fact that you’re using containers shouldn’t matter which BGP daemon you will decide using. if you’re comfortable with quagga, containerize quagga. if you like gobgp, use gobgp. they all can be containerized and will work fine if the all the underlying foundation is proper configured. —vicente > On Jun 14, 2018, at 12:00 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: > > On 6/14/2018 12:56 PM, james jones wrote: >> I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best >> option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs >> and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking >> any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? >> -James > > *twitches* > > Please don't let this be an actual thing with something as critical as BGP. > > -- > Brielle Bruns > The Summit Open Source Development Group > http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org
Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?
Not sure I've seen it mentioned, so will throw NetBox into the mix. https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox - jay On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:50 PM Eric Kuhnke wrote: > Either phpipam or nipap. > > Both use fairly standard database backends and db schema (usually something > as simple as mariadb listenong on localhost only, on the same VM that is > the apache2 or nginx + php stack), allowing you to scale up to external > tools that do read only queries of the IP database for other purposes. > > On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 1:48 PM, Mike Lyon wrote: > > > Title says it all... Currently using IPPlan, but it is kinda antiquated.. > > > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > > -- > > Mike Lyon > > mike.l...@gmail.com > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon > > > -- - Jay C.
Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?
Netbox. Open source IPAM and DCIM built by DigitalOcean https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 5:50 PM Eric Kuhnke wrote: > Either phpipam or nipap. > > Both use fairly standard database backends and db schema (usually something > as simple as mariadb listenong on localhost only, on the same VM that is > the apache2 or nginx + php stack), allowing you to scale up to external > tools that do read only queries of the IP database for other purposes. > > On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 1:48 PM, Mike Lyon wrote: > > > Title says it all... Currently using IPPlan, but it is kinda antiquated.. > > > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > > -- > > Mike Lyon > > mike.l...@gmail.com > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon > > >
Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
On 06/11/2018 05:16 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: --- cb.li...@gmail.com wrote: From: Ca By Meanwhile, FB reports that 75% of mobiles in the USA reach them via ipv6 And Akaimai reports 80% of mobiles And they both report ipv6 is faster / better. Let me grab a few more for you: https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/06/preparing-for-ipv6-only-mobile-networks-why-and-how.html https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/10/ipv6-at-akamai-edge-2016.html https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/28/ipv6_now_faster_a_fifth_of_the_time which cites an academic paper http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2959424.2959429 by Vaibhav Bajpai and Jürgen Schönwälder https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ipv6-measurements-zaid-ali-kahn/ https://community.infoblox.com/t5/IPv6-CoE-Blog/Can-IPv6-Rally-Be-Faster-than-IPv4-Part-1/ba-p/6419 https://www.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2281 I'd sure like to see how they came up with these numbers in a technically oriented paper. Most of the above links explain how they got the numbers. Facebook, in particular, did A/B testing using Mobile Proxygen, which is to say that they configured their mobile app to report performance over both IPv4 and IPv6 from the same handset at the same time. Others, including APNIC's https://stats.labs.apnic.net/v6perf have a browser fetch two objects with unique URLs, one from an IPv4-only server and one from an IPv6-only server, and compare them. There should be no difference, except for no CGN or Happy Eyeballs working better or something similar. Am I missing something? Same routers; same links; same RTTs; same interrupt times on servers; same etc, etc for both protocols. From time to time somebody says, "Okay, maybe it works in practice, but does it work in *theory*?" Busy engineers hardly ever investigate things going inexplicably right. My hypothesis is that the observed difference in performance relates to how mobile networks deploy their transition mechanisms. Those with a dual-stack APN take a native path for IPv6, while using a CGN path for IPv4, which, combined with the Happy Eyeballs head start, might add 501microseconds, which is a ms, which is 15% of 7ms. Those with an IPv6-only APN use a native path for IPv6, while using either a NAT64 for IPv4 (identical performance to CGN) or 464xlat, which requires translation both in the handset and the NAT64; handsets may not be optimized for header translation. However, I have a dozen other hypotheses, and the few experiments I've been able to run have not confirmed any hypothesis. For instance, when one protocol is faster than another on a landline network, hop count is not a correlation (therefore, shorter paths, traffic engineering, etc., are not involved). Lee Hmm... Faster and better? The links seem to be an IPv6 cheerleader write up. I looked at the URLs and the URLs one pointed to and pulled out everything related to IPv6 being faster/better. Akamai URL: "For dual-stacked hostnames we typically see higher average estimated throughput over IPv6 than over IPv4. Some of this may be due to IPv6-connected users being correlated with better connectivity, but over half of dual-stacked hostnames (weighted by daily bytes delivered) have IPv6 estimated throughput at least 50% faster than IPv4, and 90% of these hostnames have the IPv6 estimated throughput at least 10% faster than IPv4." FB URL: "People using Facebook services typically see better performance over IPv6..." and it points to https://code.facebook.com/posts/1192894270727351/ipv6-it-s-time-to-get-on-board which says: "We’ve long been anticipating the exhaustion of IPv in favor of the speed and performance benefits of IPv6." "We’ve observed that accessing Facebook can be 10-15 percent faster over IPv6." I'd sure like to see how they came up with these numbers in a technically oriented paper. There should be no difference, except for no CGN or Happy Eyeballs working better or something similar. Am I missing something? Same routers; same links; same RTTs; same interrupt times on servers; same etc, etc for both protocols. scott
Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
Assuming IPv6+translation, yes, you need IPv4 addresses of Good Repute for the outside; that might requiring constant monitoring, and notifying various content that it's shared address space. It's the same operational problem as CGNAT44, but reduced because half (or more) of your traffic is using unshared IPv6. Among other things, that means you don't need as many IPv4 addresses. "But wait!" you say, because you're clever, "The original poster only wanted a /24. Surely you're not saying you could put less than a /24 outside your CGN (44 or 64) and have it routed?" Maybe the /28 is part of your larger aggregate. Or maybe it's a shared translator, handling, say, eight small companies who only need a /28 each. And yes, you want very careful reputation monitoring in that case, and maybe some effort to prevent things that get one placed on Lists of Addresses of Ill Repute. Sales pitch available on demand. Lee Howard Retevia.net On 06/11/2018 12:56 PM, Michael Crapse wrote: Never do i suggest to not have ipv6! Simply that no matter what, You still have to traverse to ipv4 when you exit your ipv6 network onto ipv4 only services. What IPv4 addresses are you going to use for the NAT64, or 464xlat, or even the business customers that require static IPv4 addresses? Someone made a statement that getting more ipv6 would solve OP's problem of finding more clean ipv4 space On 11 June 2018 at 10:50, Ca By wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Michael Crapse wrote: For an eyeball network, you cannot count on an IPv6 only network. Because all of your "customers" will complain because they can't get to hulu, or any other ipv4 only eyeball service. You still need the ipv4s to operate a proper network, and good luck figuring out which services are blacklisting your new /24 because the ipv4 space used to be a VPN provider, and the "in" thing to do for these services is to block VPNs. There are many IPv6-only eyeball networks. Definitely many examples in wireless (T-Mobile, Sprint, BT ) and wireline (DT with DS-Lite in Germany, Orange Poland ...) and even more where IPv4 NAT44 + IPv6 is used. Just saying, having ipv6 hedges a lot of risk associate with blacklisting and translation related overhead and potentially scale and cost of IPv4 addresses. On 11 June 2018 at 09:21, Ca By wrote: On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 8:43 AM Stan Ouchakov Hi, Can anyone recommend transfer market brokers for ipv4 addresses? Need clean /24 asap. ARIN's waiting list is too long... Thanks! -Stan Meanwhile, FB reports that 75% of mobiles in the USA reach them via ipv6 https://code.facebook.com/posts/635039943508824/how-ipv6-dep loyment-is-growing-in-u-s-and-other-countries/ And Akaimai reports 80% of mobiles https://blogs.akamai.com/2018/06/six-years-since-world-ipv6- launch-entering-the-majority-phases.html And they both report ipv6 is faster / better.
Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?
Can we please stop spamming the list with this crap now? > On Jun 12, 2018, at 10:37 PM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > > On 06/12/2018 08:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >>> emacs! >> vim! > ed! TECO! >>> cat >> IBM 029. > > Youngster. IBM 026.
Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?
Device42. https://www.device42.com/ On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:53 AM Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Randy Bush said: > > > If you start with Excel, down Will It Scale Road, you will be sorry, > > > so very sorry. Especially when it comes to v6. > > > > emacs! > > vim! > -- > Chris Adams >
Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?
sorry, but nano4lyfe! On 6/12/18 2:52 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Randy Bush said: If you start with Excel, down Will It Scale Road, you will be sorry, so very sorry. Especially when it comes to v6. emacs! vim!
Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?
Check out TIPP; http://tipp.tobez.org /Brian søn. 10. jun. 2018 kl. 22.51 skrev Mike Lyon : > Title says it all... Currently using IPPlan, but it is kinda antiquated.. > > Thanks, > Mike > > -- > Mike Lyon > mike.l...@gmail.com > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon >
Re: BGP in a containers
re: Exa: Our use case was both on exporting service IPs as well as receiving routes from ToRs. Exa is more geared towards the former than the latter. Rather then working on getting imports and route installation through Exa, we found it simpler with BIRD exporting the service IP from it bound to a loopback to run local healthchecks on the nodes and then have them yank the service IP from the loopback on failing healthchecks in order to stop exporting. But, YMMV etc. -- Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal On Thu 2018-Jun-14 15:07:35 -0400, james jones wrote: Yes, that's it. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:05 PM Michel 'ic' Luczak wrote: > On 14 Jun 2018, at 20:56, james jones wrote: > > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? I guess / hope what you’re trying to achieve is to announce services from the containers using BGP. If this is the case, what you’re looking for is called exabgp. ic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: BGP in a containers
2018-06-14 20:56 GMT+02:00 james jones : > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? If this is to run bgp to the ToR, this is a nice way do have redundant paths to a server. Exabgp is a nice tool for this, and a colleague of mine developed 'bagpipe' (https://github.com/Orange-OpenSource/bagpipe-bgp) for this, now part of openstack (https://github.com/openstack/networking-bagpipe) but still usable as a standalone daemon.
Re: BGP in a containers
there's actually a not insignificant part of the 'network device' world which is in fact just really a container and "quagga" (or similar). James, do you care about being close to a 'cisco like' config world? (quagga) more programmatic? (exa-bgp, gobgp .. a few others) something else? On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:05 PM Dovid Bender wrote: > I know of a telco that has been doing this it helps them be able to move > around containers and not have constantly configure IP's on servers. > > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: > > > On 6/14/2018 12:56 PM, james jones wrote: > > > >> I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the > best > >> option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot > blogs > >> and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over > >> looking > >> any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? > >> > >> -James > >> > >> > > *twitches* > > > > Please don't let this be an actual thing with something as critical as > BGP. > > > > -- > > Brielle Bruns > > The Summit Open Source Development Group > > http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org > > >
Re: BGP in a containers
Have a peak at https://osrg.github.io/gobgp/ and https://github.com/osrg/dockerfiles On 14 Jun 2018, at 20:56, james jones wrote: > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? > > -James
Re: BGP in a containers
bird is better than quagga! (runs away) ;) 14.06.18 21:56, james jones пише: > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? > > -James >
Re: BGP in a containers
This is generally in the context of routing-on-the-host setups. We're using BIRD for that in a kubernetes deployment. -- Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal On Thu 2018-Jun-14 13:05:58 -0600, Michael Crapse wrote: I agree, i hope that this is for testing/testbench purposes only, or only running iBGP, as no one in the world would like for you to be running a public BGP through a docker instance. On 14 June 2018 at 13:00, Brielle Bruns wrote: On 6/14/2018 12:56 PM, james jones wrote: I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? -James *twitches* Please don't let this be an actual thing with something as critical as BGP. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: BGP in a containers
Yes, that's it. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:05 PM Michel 'ic' Luczak wrote: > > > On 14 Jun 2018, at 20:56, james jones wrote: > > > > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot > blogs > > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over > looking > > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? > > I guess / hope what you’re trying to achieve is to announce services from > the containers using BGP. If this is the case, what you’re looking for is > called exabgp. > > ic > > >
Re: BGP in a containers
On 6/14/18 11:56 AM, james jones wrote: I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? https://docs.cumulusnetworks.com/display/HOSTPACK/Configuring+FRRouting+on+the+Host -James
Re: BGP in a containers
I agree, i hope that this is for testing/testbench purposes only, or only running iBGP, as no one in the world would like for you to be running a public BGP through a docker instance. On 14 June 2018 at 13:00, Brielle Bruns wrote: > On 6/14/2018 12:56 PM, james jones wrote: > >> I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best >> option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs >> and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over >> looking >> any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? >> >> -James >> >> > *twitches* > > Please don't let this be an actual thing with something as critical as BGP. > > -- > Brielle Bruns > The Summit Open Source Development Group > http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org >
Re: BGP in a containers
> On 14 Jun 2018, at 20:56, james jones wrote: > > I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best > option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs > and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking > any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? I guess / hope what you’re trying to achieve is to announce services from the containers using BGP. If this is the case, what you’re looking for is called exabgp. ic
Re: BGP in a containers
I know of a telco that has been doing this it helps them be able to move around containers and not have constantly configure IP's on servers. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: > On 6/14/2018 12:56 PM, james jones wrote: > >> I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best >> option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs >> and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over >> looking >> any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? >> >> -James >> >> > *twitches* > > Please don't let this be an actual thing with something as critical as BGP. > > -- > Brielle Bruns > The Summit Open Source Development Group > http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org >
Re: BGP in a containers
On 6/14/2018 12:56 PM, james jones wrote: I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? -James *twitches* Please don't let this be an actual thing with something as critical as BGP. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org
BGP in a containers
I am working on an personal experiment and was wondering what is the best option for running BGP in a docker base container. I have seen a lot blogs and docs referencing Quagga. I just want to make sure I am not over looking any other options before I dive in. Any thoughts or suggestions? -James
