mpls-linux-general

[mpls-linux-general] quagga-ldp vs quagga-mpls

[Daniel Q. <da...@ch...>]

hi,

what's the difference between the quagga patches in ldp-portable and
mpls-linux?  

there's also quagga-ldp and quagga-mpls in the P4 depot.

is one obseleted or do they serve different purposes?

regards,
Daniel Quinlan

Re: [mpls-linux-general] quagga-ldp vs quagga-mpls

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 04:39:12PM +1000, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> hi,
>=20
> what's the difference between the quagga patches in ldp-portable and
> mpls-linux? =20

I haven't updated the patch in ldp-portable for sometime.  The one
in mpls-linux is more recent.

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.

> there's also quagga-ldp and quagga-mpls in the P4 depot.

quagg-ldp is obselete, quagga-mpls is where current development is occuring.

> is one obseleted or do they serve different purposes?
>=20
> regards,
> Daniel Quinlan
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.
> Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course
> Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005
> Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

--=20
James R. Leu
jl...@mi...

Re: [mpls-linux-general] quagga-ldp vs quagga-mpls

[Daniel Q. <da...@ch...>]

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?  
> 
> I haven't updated the patch in ldp-portable for sometime.  The one
> in mpls-linux is more recent.

aah, ok.  thanks for clarifying that

> 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.

ok, I've checked out quagga-mpls from the P4 depot and got it compiled
and installed.

by 'not ready for users' do you mean 'not working' or 'working with
rough edges' ??

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

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?

if not, where do I need to start looking to make it?

regards,
Daniel Quinlan

Re: [mpls-linux-general] quagga-ldp vs quagga-mpls

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

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...

Re: [mpls-linux-general] quagga-ldp vs quagga-mpls

[Kim O. <kar...@gm...>]

Yes, please

I was looking for a document/experience between Ciscos and mpls-linux,
please share this project with us if possible.

On 10/27/05, James R. Leu <jl...@mi...> wrote:
>
> 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 an=
d
> > > > mpls-linux?
> > >
> > > I haven't updated the patch in ldp-portable for sometime. The one
> > > in mpls-linux is more recent.
> >
> > aah, ok. thanks for clarifying that
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > ok, I've checked out quagga-mpls from the P4 depot and got it compiled
> > and installed.
> >
> > 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
> >
>
> --
> James R. Leu
> jl...@mi...
>
>
>