[Quagga-users 34] Re: so...

Gilad Arnold gilad.arnold at terayon.com
Sun Aug 3 14:43:22 IST 2003

Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:

>>What would I suggest? IMO, the majority of patches to quagga won't carry 
>>any platform-dependent properties:
> Well, actually they don't because they can't :-)
> My idea was (pretty obvious but nevertheless for completeness):
> bgpd needs a maintainer who has deep knownledge about bgp
> ospfd needs a maintainer who has deep knowledge about ospf
> ripd needs - well, you name it ;-)
> You get the idea?

I'm not sure... let me see, you mean that isisd needs a maintainer with 
deep knowledge of, hmmm... IS-IS?? Elementary, Watson...  (Yes, I get 
it, thank you for being so illustrative... ;-> )

> quaggad is in fact a very abstract piece of code that should have no idea at
> all about the hw it runs on. It needs an abstraction layer that allows to use
> all platforms equivalently.

Appears I wasn't very clear: in fact, I meant the OS/kernel (Linux with 
different kernel APIs, BSD flavors, Solaris, you name it) and it's 
accompanying development environment (libc, gcc, make/gmake, automake), 
and not the hardware -- clearly the latter has nothing to do with 
zebra/quagga whatsoever. I believe this is what Kunihiro referred to 
when he spoke of portability.

> This is all where basic brainstorming, and completely off-topic in the
> users-list :-)

Trivial. (And off-topic ;-> )  (yet, from my humble experience with 
zebra patching, this is an issue)


More information about the Quagga-users mailing list