Re: [mpls-linux-general] quagga-ldp vs quagga-mpls
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
jleu
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2005-10-27 05:11:14
|
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 02:59:59PM +1000, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 22:06 -0500, James R. Leu wrote: > > > what's the difference between the quagga patches in ldp-portable and > > > mpls-linux? =20 > >=20 > > I haven't updated the patch in ldp-portable for sometime. The one > > in mpls-linux is more recent. >=20 > aah, ok. thanks for clarifying that >=20 > > One thing to note, is that quagga-mpls is not ready for users. It still > > is buggy. If you are planning on helping in the development of > > mpls-linux/quagga-mpls you will want to use the code in the P4 depot. >=20 > ok, I've checked out quagga-mpls from the P4 depot and got it compiled > and installed. >=20 > by 'not ready for users' do you mean 'not working' or 'working with > rough edges' ?? I would say the later of the two, others may say the former :-) > to give some background I work for an ISP and we're hoping to get a > linux box into our MPLS cloud to do some management/monitoring type > stuff Ahhh. Someone who has a definitive use, this is good. I am more then willing to help someone, help me, get quagga-mpls working for a specific case. > we've just moved all our Cisco gear over to LDP from TDP. is > mpls-linux/quagga-mpls at a stage where it could talk to our Cisco gear? I have been testing about juniper gear. I do not have access to any Cisco gear that can run MPLS code. > if not, where do I need to start looking to make it? You should be able to form an single adj and a session with a Cisco, initial label exchange should work fine, but right now the place I'm seeing failures is when binding a route to a LSP. Let me know how your initial testing goes. > regards, > Daniel Quinlan >=20 --=20 James R. Leu jl...@mi... |