[quagga-dev 734] Re: ripd status

Gilad Arnold gilad.arnold at terayon.com
Wed Jan 14 14:42:20 GMT 2004

sowmini.varadhan at sun.com wrote:

> This solution is unavoidably OS-dependant. Sometimes, as in the case
> of Linux or Solaris (when IP multipathing is enabled), the OS will
> pass up flags to indicate which address is "primary" (the rest
> being secondary/deprecated/back-up) and the daemon has to be in step 
> with the kernel. Otherwise, the daemon could end up picking a deprecated
> address as source address, and misleading/confusing listeners into
> using the deprecated address for the destination.

I agree it would be ideal given that one comes up with an approach 
that's general enough to cover all possible breeds of kernel behaviors, 
and one can also implement it successfully in quagga (I believe it takes 
some change in architecture, since it will require tying all address 
redistribution to the event of address reflection from the kernel layer, 
eg netlink).

By the way, for the sake of this particular problem -- what could be the 
harm in using a secondary/deprecated/back-up address as destination by 
neighbors? I mean, any secondary address is always valid for receiving, 
isn't it?


More information about the Quagga-dev mailing list