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