OK. Actually I did that first before adding the interface flag. Jiangxin
-----Original Message----- From: Ben Greear [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 3:12 PM To: Jiangxin Hu Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Xorp-hackers] XORP enhancement for wireless mesh network routing On 06/01/2012 12:07 PM, Jiangxin Hu wrote: >>> First, I believe it would be possible to want this feature enabled >>> on > non-wireless interfaces, so maybe instead of having>> a 'wireless' > attribute, we could call it something like 'allow-disconnected-routes' > or something like that. >>> And maybe we should just always allow those routes to be added and >>> not > even bother with all the framework to set the flag? > > Agree if we allow such routes for wired network. I don't know it is > meaningful for wired network or not. > >>> At least some of the changes do not appear directly related to the > 'wireless' >>> flag. Maybe there was some cleanup included? If so, it would be >>> nice if > that were a separate patch. > > There are two things in the code changes: > 1. the parameter 'wireless' (fea, ifmgr, mirror, etc.) 2. the > execution part (fea, rib) > in order to insert such route into kernel, the add route function > call must declare such route as scope-link type route > also, theoretically, the route -- destination net: 192.168.0.0/24 > next > hop: 192.168.0.1 interface: eth0 is a valid route > for node 1 configure such as eth0:10.0.0.1/24. however, I don't > think any wireless routing protocol generated such rotue now. I think any interface can be used in a mesh, even if it is mostly wireless devices in the real world. If the routing protocol thinks a route should be added, and the kernel doesn't complain, I see no reason for FEA to complain... > * This work is done on Fedora core 16, so other system may not work. > * 'wireless' parameter is for interface only, any vif under the > interface will be treated as wireless vif Would you care to re-do the patch so that you just change FEA to always allow these types of routes, and skip adding the new interface flag (and all the related xrl stuff)? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <[email protected]> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ Xorp-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers
