[quagga-dev 12089] Re: Advise on implementation
lberger at labn.net
Tue Mar 3 19:23:59 GMT 2015
Have you considered introducing a generic TED (topology database)
deamon in parallel to zebra? I think this would more closely match what
other implementations have done and there are many advantages over
direct protocol exchanges.
And yes, I know this question/topic is orthogonal to the current
question/thread on shm vs ipc/rpc.
On 3/3/2015 12:37 PM, Olivier Dugeon wrote:
> Hello Dinesh,
> What do you mean by 'may no longer be isolated from each other' ? They
> are already link to the zebra daemon.
> In order to implement BGP-LS, we need some communication between OSFP,
> IS-IS and BGP. Of course, this will
> break this isolation principle, but wathever the solution will be.
> Le 03/03/2015 16:31, Dinesh Dutt a écrit :
>> +1, plus the issue that the various daemons may no longer be isolated
>> from each other due to this shm,
>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com
>> <mailto:gdt at ir.bbn.com>> wrote:
>> My basic opinion is that shm interfaces end up being painful for
>> reasons, including portability but also leaving shm segments around.
>> Since this is control plane, and sockets are fast anyway, I don't see
>> any reason to get wrapped up in shm.
>> Quagga-dev mailing list
>> Quagga-dev at lists.quagga.net <mailto:Quagga-dev at lists.quagga.net>
> Quagga-dev mailing list
> Quagga-dev at lists.quagga.net
More information about the Quagga-dev