dear firiend,
do you have configuration routing BGP in freebsd ?
thank you
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr
Hi,
On 22/03/2013 12:28 PM, just man man wrote:
do you have configuration routing BGP in freebsd ?
thank you
I use quagga, because that's what I have been using for the last 10 years.
http://www.freshports.org/net/quagga-re/
http://www.freshports.org/net/quagga/
You might also like to try
Hi,
On 22/03/2013 12:28 PM, just man man wrote:
do you have configuration routing BGP in freebsd ?
thank you
I use quagga, because that's what I have been using for the last 10 years.
http://www.freshports.org/net/quagga-re/
http://www.freshports.org/net/quagga/
You might also
On May 14, 2009, at 12:55 AM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
is there a way to have FreeBSD work as BGP router and/or at least
failover between 2 different ISPs?
I, as some random guy on the Internet, would recommend Quagga and,
yes, it will work with 2+ ISP's
is there a way to have FreeBSD work as BGP router and/or at least
failover between 2 different ISPs?
--
http://alexus.org/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 13:27, alexus ale...@gmail.com wrote:
is there a way to have FreeBSD work as BGP router and/or at least
failover between 2 different ISPs?
While I have yet to work with either, I know that xorp and quagga will
both do BGP.
Kurt
is there a way to have FreeBSD work as BGP router and/or at least
failover between 2 different ISPs?
I, as some random guy on the Internet, would recommend Quagga and, yes, it will
work with 2+ ISP's on single device (server). It's well established and in use
for transit-facing Internet
look at ports index there are BGP deamons
On Wed, 13 May 2009, alexus wrote:
is there a way to have FreeBSD work as BGP router and/or at least
failover between 2 different ISPs?
--
http://alexus.org/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
is there a way to have FreeBSD work as BGP router and/or at least
failover between 2 different ISPs?
I, as some random guy on the Internet, would recommend Quagga and, yes, it
will work with 2+ ISP's on single device (server). It's well established
/), I get
the message: The selected data sources have no information on
prefix n.n.n.68/30. Please check that this prefix is globally
announced.
My question: shouldn't it be 'announced', if the ISP intends
to route me TCP/IP traffic? I apologize for my ignorance,
but BGP isn't something I figured
,
but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this
point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually)
anything smaller than a /24 will be filtered. The ISP would announce
the larger block that your /30 lives in.
Thank you very much, Elliot; You wouldn't believe how
ignorance,
but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this
point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually)
anything smaller than a /24 will be filtered. The ISP would announce
the larger block that your /30 lives
intends
to route me TCP/IP traffic? I apologize for my ignorance,
but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this
point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually)
anything smaller than a /24 will be filtered. The ISP would announce
the larger block that your /30
of IPs.
Granted it's not the case, but:
I was of the opinion that maybe they hadn't for the one
block we're supposed to be in, thus my question re: BGP for
the 68/30 CIDR, but, per your answer, I've no way to know
unless they tell me since the route isn't publicized.
Your ISP *HAS* put the route
balancer with pf, it works
perfectly but only for outgoing traffic;
- I've noticed that almost everybody thing that it cannot be done load
balancing with BSD of incoming and outgoing without help of that both
ISP (BGP)
- I find hardware with proprietary OS/firmware that can do load
balancing
but only for outgoing traffic;
- I've noticed that almost everybody thing that it cannot be done load
balancing with BSD of incoming and outgoing without help of that both
ISP (BGP)
- I find hardware with proprietary OS/firmware that can do load
balancing without support of ISP. Some are cheap (300
Hello all
I'm trying to get router ffrom mine country..
so I will be able to NAT router to my country without any limit..
look what I get from my ISP:
(email)
configured:
router bgp 13194
neighbor 213.226.136.250 remote-as 65006
configure Your ZEBRA:
remote-as: 13194
neighbor
Has anybody heard of making a webserver redundant using BGP? That is, if I
set up 2 machines on different ISP's, with exactly the same content on them
(mirrored). If both hosts are up, the traffic is routed to the closes
server to the person making the request. Otherwise, if one server is down
(mirrored). If both hosts are up, the traffic is routed to the closes
server to the person making the request. Otherwise, if one server is down,
traffic is automatically re-routed to the other box.
That is not what BGP is made for. It's an exterior routing protocol for
routes between
I wasn't sure if it was BGP or if it was something else. Definetly between
routers would be using BGP. But, I heard at an apache conference somebody
was doing something where the machine would send a keepalive to the directly
connected Cisco router, and if the router didn't receive the keepalive
sounds like you are describing a load balancing switch ... two seperate
boxes behind the switch, with a single public IP in front that sends a
heartbeat to the boxes behind it ...
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004, Rick Duvall wrote:
I wasn't sure if it was BGP or if it was something else. Definetly
they are
doing is something to do with BGP, in which they have multiple servers in
different countries, all with the same IP address. Traffic is routed to the
nearest logical server, until one goes down, then the traffic is routed to
the nearest logical server that is still up. That is what I am wanting
It's a reasonable way to perform certain kinds of replication.
DDNS can often converge faster than BGP, but this *requires*
that clients observe TTLs. Many do not. I don't know about
current browsers, but not too long ago browsers would keep
the results of a DNS lookup until they died.
We
23 matches
Mail list logo
