The Linux Kernel itself may be GPL (which I wasn't debating), however I see no
reason why MikroTik's MPLS stack couldn't work in a similar way to the closed
source NVidia driers where my understanding is that a GPL stub loads a binary
blob.
Have you asked MikroTik for a copy of the source?
Edw
Edward Dore writes:
> They used to publish the source for their 2.4 kernel on
> routerboard.com (in fact, it's still available at
> http://routerboard.com/files/linux-2.4.31.zip), but I've not seen
> anything for the 2.6 kernel however and the routerboard.com site was
> redesigned a little while
Seth Mattinen writes:
> What's the state of MPLS on Linux these days?
There was some renewed interest "recently" (i.e. last year). See the
discussion starting at
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg180282.html
But do note davem's replies in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg180401.html
re which package they use, or if they rolled their own MPLS
>> support...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>
>> From: "Seth Mattinen"
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:42:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
>>
>>
>> What's the state of MPLS on Linux these days?
>>
>> ~Seth
>>
>>
>>
>
>
ooked, the "mpls-linux" project over at SourceForge was
> incomplete and slow - I have no idea if this has changed at all recently
> however.
> > >
> > > Edward Dore
> > > Freethought Internet
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message
nal Message -
> > From: "Walter Keen"
> > To: "Seth Mattinen"
> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 August, 2012 2:00:52 AM
> > Subject: Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
> >
> > I'm fairly sure that Mikrotik software is base
t;Seth Mattinen"
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 August, 2012 2:00:52 AM
> Subject: Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
>
> I'm fairly sure that Mikrotik software is based on linux, and supports MPLS.
>
> Not too sure which package they use, or if they rolled their
t;
>
>
>
> - Original Message -----
>
> From: "Seth Mattinen"
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:42:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
>
>
> What's the state of MPLS on Linux these days?
>
> ~Seth
>
>
>
t Internet
- Original Message -
From: "Walter Keen"
To: "Seth Mattinen"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, 29 August, 2012 2:00:52 AM
Subject: Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
I'm fairly sure that Mikrotik software is based on linux, and supports MPLS.
Not too sure which
PM
Subject: Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
What's the state of MPLS on Linux these days?
~Seth
What's the state of MPLS on Linux these days?
~Seth
> > Personally I would like to see more work on all three opensource
> > implementations, i.e. BIRD, OpenBGPd and Quagga.
>
> http://opensourcerouting.org/ to the rescue?
Hi, I'm David Lamparter, employed at the OpenSourceRouting (OSR) project
to maintain Quagga.
I can tell you that the OSR's int
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM, David Hubbard
wrote:
> Of those who have used Quagga or Bird, or anything else,
> would either of them be appropriate and/or well suited for
> use as an iBGP blackhole route server? We currently
> do blackholes via manual config on one of our real
> routers but ar
Don't forget about XORP if you have any need for multicast routing ...
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Sorry to disrupt the bad cabling thread, but I'd like to revisit a thread
> from 2 years ago. I have read over the NANOG presentations:
> http://www.nanog.org/meetings
On 23 Aug 2012, at 15:04, Raymond Burkholder wrote:
> To expand the opinion set, how do Quagga, Bird, exaBGP, OpenBGPd hold up for
> handling Multi-Protocol BGP Route Reflector duties in a BGP/MPLS environment
> for a smaller ISP?
I am using BIRD as a RR between a busy VRF and our core and will
Fell free to contact me if you have any questions about ExaBGP as I am
painfully aware it's documentation is nowhere near what it should be.
Thomas
Sent from my iPad
On 23 Aug 2012, at 08:52, Andy Davidson wrote:
>
> On 22 Aug 2012, at 18:42, David Hubbard wrote:
>
>> Of those who have use
>
> > Of those who have used Quagga or Bird, or anything else,
> > would either of them be appropriate and/or well suited for
> > use as an iBGP blackhole route server?
>
To expand the opinion set, how do Quagga, Bird, exaBGP, OpenBGPd hold up for
handling Multi-Protocol BGP Route Reflector duti
On 22 Aug 2012, at 18:42, David Hubbard wrote:
> Of those who have used Quagga or Bird, or anything else,
> would either of them be appropriate and/or well suited for
> use as an iBGP blackhole route server?
You can use Quagga or Bird as a blackhole BGP injector, because the forwarding
load is
On Wednesday, August 22, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Andy Davidson wrote:
> I'm not clear what you care about from a performance point of view -
> forwarding ? acting as a route-server ? collector ? BIRD is a great,
> super-fast route-server daemon - much "better" than typical competitors
> Quagga and Op
> Personally I would like to see more work on all three opensource
> implementations, i.e. BIRD, OpenBGPd and Quagga.
http://opensourcerouting.org/ to the rescue?
--
Christian Esteve Rothenberg, Ph.D.
Converged Networks Business Unit
CPqD - Center for Research and Development in Telecommunicatio
On 22.08.2012 11:22, John Souter wrote:
> On 22/08/12 06:19, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>> ...Any feedback appreciated.
>
> I can't speak too highly of BIRD. Our use case is probably not
> completely typical, but our multilateral peering route servers have been
> hugely improved by switching to BIRD.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM, David Hubbard
wrote:
> Of those who have used Quagga or Bird, or anything else,
> would either of them be appropriate and/or well suited for
> use as an iBGP blackhole route server? We currently
> do blackholes via manual config on one of our real
> routers but ar
Of those who have used Quagga or Bird, or anything else,
would either of them be appropriate and/or well suited for
use as an iBGP blackhole route server? We currently
do blackholes via manual config on one of our real
routers but are wanting to add a software-based (on linux)
system where we cou
Hello,
I came across this site a few weeks ago
http://code.google.com/p/google-quagga/source/list
Seems that Google (or at least some Googlers) are working on quagga, or
worked as the last update is tagged July 2011.
Main difference I see between Quagga and Bird, is that it is now possible
to ru
On 22/08/12 06:19, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> ...Any feedback appreciated.
I can't speak too highly of BIRD. Our use case is probably not
completely typical, but our multilateral peering route servers have been
hugely improved by switching to BIRD. Our two primary route servers,
one for each LINX
On 22/08/12 06:19, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Sorry to disrupt the bad cabling thread, but I'd like to revisit a
> thread from 2 years ago. I have read over the NANOG presentations:
> http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Monday/Jasinska_RouteServer_N48.pdf
>
> http://www.nanog.org/mee
Sorry to disrupt the bad cabling thread, but I'd like to revisit a thread
from 2 years ago. I have read over the NANOG presentations:
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Monday/Jasinska_RouteServer_N48.pdf
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Monday/Filip_BIRD_fina
27 matches
Mail list logo
