Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2017-01-19 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2017 Jan 19 (Thu) at 06:26:25 +0100 (+0100), Peter Hessler wrote: :On 2016 Dec 17 (Sat) at 14:05:40 +0100 (+0100), Peter Hessler wrote: ::On 2016 Sep 30 (Fri) at 10:16:19 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: :::This diff makes route get and route monitor work. sockaddr_bfd is so we :::can play

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2017-01-18 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 06:26:25AM +0100, Peter Hessler wrote: > On 2016 Dec 17 (Sat) at 14:05:40 +0100 (+0100), Peter Hessler wrote: > :On 2016 Sep 30 (Fri) at 10:16:19 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: > ::This diff makes route get and route monitor work. sockaddr_bfd is so we > ::can play

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2017-01-18 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2016 Dec 17 (Sat) at 14:05:40 +0100 (+0100), Peter Hessler wrote: :On 2016 Sep 30 (Fri) at 10:16:19 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: ::This diff makes route get and route monitor work. sockaddr_bfd is so we ::can play like the other RTAX_* indexes in rti_info of route messages. :: In

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2017-01-12 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 23.12.2016. 16:57, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > On 21.12.2016. 23:15, Sebastian Benoit wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> it seems that bfd is working with Force10 S4810 and Extreme Networks >>> x460 switches. I can test it with cisco c6k5 if you want? >> >> Hei, >> >> i'm sure phessler (who might not read

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-28 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2016 Dec 23 (Fri) at 16:57:27 +0100 (+0100), Hrvoje Popovski wrote: :On 21.12.2016. 23:15, Sebastian Benoit wrote: :>> Hi, :>> :>> it seems that bfd is working with Force10 S4810 and Extreme Networks :>> x460 switches. I can test it with cisco c6k5 if you want? :> :> Hei, :> :> i'm sure

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-23 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 21.12.2016. 23:15, Sebastian Benoit wrote: >> Hi, >> >> it seems that bfd is working with Force10 S4810 and Extreme Networks >> x460 switches. I can test it with cisco c6k5 if you want? > > Hei, > > i'm sure phessler (who might not read this for a couple of days) is happy > about any test you

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-21 Thread Sebastian Benoit
Hrvoje Popovski(hrv...@srce.hr) on 2016.12.21 22:03:56 +0100: > On 17.12.2016. 14:05, Peter Hessler wrote: > > Updated output, requested by Theo. A normal get will show just the bfd > > state, use "-bfd" to get all of the information. > > > > OK? > > > > $ route -n get 203.0.113.9 > >route

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-21 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 17.12.2016. 14:05, Peter Hessler wrote: > Updated output, requested by Theo. A normal get will show just the bfd > state, use "-bfd" to get all of the information. > > OK? > > $ route -n get 203.0.113.9 >route to: 203.0.113.9 > destination: 203.0.113.9 >mask: 255.255.255.255 >

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-17 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2016 Sep 30 (Fri) at 10:16:19 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: :This diff makes route get and route monitor work. sockaddr_bfd is so we :can play like the other RTAX_* indexes in rti_info of route messages. : :OK? Updated output, requested by Theo. A normal get will show just the bfd

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-13 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2016 Dec 05 (Mon) at 15:39:31 +0100 (+0100), Peter Hessler wrote: :On 2016 Sep 30 (Fri) at 10:16:19 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: ::This diff makes route get and route monitor work. sockaddr_bfd is so we ::can play like the other RTAX_* indexes in rti_info of route messages. :: ::OK? ::

Re: BFD: route get and route monitor

2016-12-05 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2016 Sep 30 (Fri) at 10:16:19 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: :This diff makes route get and route monitor work. sockaddr_bfd is so we :can play like the other RTAX_* indexes in rti_info of route messages. : :OK? : : :$ route -n monitor :got