nanog mailing list archives
Re: US patent 5473599
From: Henning Brauer <hb-nanog () bsws de>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 09:48:26 +0200
* Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> [2014-05-08 07:16]:
If they take their ball and go home, that's fine. The problem is that they seem to occasionally have their ball brought (by systems administrators) to networks where the network engineers are already running VRRP on routers (for example) and because: 1. The systems administrators don't necessarily have in-depth knowledge of what the network is doing.
nothing technology can solve
2. The network administrators don't necessarily get told about every detail of the Systems administrators intentions.
nothing technology can solve
3. There's no knowledge among the two groups that either is using the other protocol (CARP vs. VRRP)
nothing technology can solve
4. There's even less knowledge that the two are going to fight with each other.
that is a lie, they coexist just fine. even with "conflicting" mac addrs you just get log spam.
OTOH, if the BSD folk had (or in the future did) fix CARP so that instead of trying to steal VRRP MAC addresses in a conflicting manner, it would either use a non-conflicting MAC prefix (how about one with the locally assigned bit set, such as the VRRP Mac | 0x02000:0000:0000) and make a legitimate attempt at getting CARP into an RFC with a legitimately assigned protocol number, everyone could get along without issue.
awaiting your diff. -- Henning Brauer, hb () bsws de, henning () openbsd org BS Web Services GmbH, AG Hamburg HRB 128289, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, VMs/PVS, Application Hosting
Current thread:
- Re: US patent 5473599, (continued)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 06)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Owen DeLong (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 TGLASSEY (May 07)
- RE: US patent 5473599 Leo Vegoda (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 David Conrad (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Matt Palmer (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Rob Seastrom (May 07)
- Please moderate yourselves, was: Re: US patent 5473599 joel jaeggli (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Robert Drake (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Owen DeLong (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Job Snijders (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Owen DeLong (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Matt Palmer (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Bill Fenner (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Randy Bush (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 sthaug (May 06)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Eygene Ryabinkin (May 07)