Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
From: Ray Soucy <rps () maine edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 13:50:21 -0400

Don't forget about XORP if you have any need for multicast routing ...

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Hank Nussbacher <hank () efes iucc ac il> wrote:
Sorry to disrupt the bad cabling thread, but I'd like to revisit a thread
from 2 years ago.  I have read over the NANOG presentations:
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Monday/Jasinska_RouteServer_N48.pdf
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Monday/Filip_BIRD_final_N48.pdf
as well as the NANOG thread:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/123027
But have not found anything worthwhile on the matter over the past 2 years.

Both Quagga and BIRD have developed since the comparison in 2010:
http://savannah.nongnu.org/news/?group=quagga
http://bird.network.cz/?o_news

But has anyone performed a more recent comparsion?  Does Quagga still suffer
from performance issues vs BIRD?  Has anyone performed an RFC conformance
test to see who complies more strictly to all the various RFCs?

If BIRD is so much better than Quagga why is there no instance at Oregon:
http://www.routeviews.org/

I also notice that BSD Router Project supports both:
http://bsdrp.net/bsdrp
How well do the two coexist at the same time?  Any migration issues going
from Quagga to BIRD? Any feedback appreciated.

We now take you back to cable wars :-)

Thanks,
Hank





-- 
Ray Patrick Soucy
Network Engineer
University of Maine System

T: 207-561-3526
F: 207-561-3531

MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
www.maineren.net


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault