Default route depending on

Hello,

I have an AS with redundant routers. The routers will be configured with
quagga for dynamic routing with the protocol ospf. Every host in every
subnet could use two or three routers to route the packages into any
another subnet. But one of the routers should be the prefered one. Is
there a routing command available which gives me the choice to say

if router 1 is up, use router 1
if router 1 is down, use router 2
if router 1 and 2 are down, use router 3

or do I have to install quagga on every host and let quagga with ospfd
do the work.

I could imagine a command which includes the cost of the routes, so it
would always take the lowest cost route. But I don't know one.

Thanks & regards
Klaus

Klaus Gerhardt <k-gerhardt@gmx.de> writes:

>Hello,

>I have an AS with redundant routers. The routers will be configured with
>quagga for dynamic routing with the protocol ospf. Every host in every
>subnet could use two or three routers to route the packages into any
>another subnet. But one of the routers should be the prefered one. Is
>there a routing command available which gives me the choice to say

> if router 1 is up, use router 1
> if router 1 is down, use router 2
> if router 1 and 2 are down, use router 3

No. If that is what you want to do, set up one machine as a gateway, and
have it constantly check the routers looking for the lowest one that is up
and alter its routing table appropriately. What does "router 1 is up" mean?
That is probably the most difficult question you would have to deal with.



>or do I have to install quagga on every host and let quagga with ospfd
>do the work.

No idea what quagga is.


>I could imagine a command which includes the cost of the routes, so it
>would always take the lowest cost route. But I don't know one.

No idea what "cost" means in this context.
Or how the system would know what that term meant.

Hello,

Unruh schrieb:
> Klaus Gerhardt <k-gerhardt@gmx.de> writes:
>>or do I have to install quagga on every host and let quagga with ospfd
>>do the work.
>
>
> No idea what quagga is.
quagga is a dynamic routing software, a fork from zebra and zebra's
successor. It contains dynamic routing daemons for the protocols rip,
ospf, bgp, etc.

>>I could imagine a command which includes the cost of the routes, so it
>>would always take the lowest cost route. But I don't know one.
>
>
> No idea what "cost" means in this context.
> Or how the system would know what that term meant.
Usually the routing daemons deal with it. rip for example uses the hop
count as a maesure of the cost. With ospf you can define the cost of a
device (eth0, eth1, etc.) depending on bandwith. The cost of all
outgoing devices of a routing path will be added and the path with the
lowest cost will be taken.

regards
Klaus

--
Klaus Gerhardt * Holsteinische Str. 13 * 10717 Berlin
+49 (30) 8620 1523 * k-gerhardt@gmx.de
http://www.kg-it.de * http://linuxseiten.kg-it.de

Klaus Gerhardt wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have an AS with redundant routers. The routers will be configured with
> quagga for dynamic routing with the protocol ospf. Every host in every
> subnet could use two or three routers to route the packages into any
> another subnet. But one of the routers should be the prefered one. Is
> there a routing command available which gives me the choice to say
>
> if router 1 is up, use router 1
> if router 1 is down, use router 2
> if router 1 and 2 are down, use router 3
>
> or do I have to install quagga on every host and let quagga with ospfd
> do the work.
>
> I could imagine a command which includes the cost of the routes, so it
> would always take the lowest cost route. But I don't know one.
>
> Thanks & regards
> Klaus

Linux does support OSPF, since the 2.4 kernel IIRC. Each computer that you
want to take advantage of dynamic routing will need to run some sort of
daemon. routed would work if you only want to run RIP, but for OSPF (or
mixed OSPF/RIP) networks quagga (or http://www.zebra.org/ the core of
quagga) is what you want. Without the ospfd, there is nothing that would
understand what routers are up and available and what there "costs" are,
and nothing to change the route table.

matt_left_coast schrieb:
> Linux does support OSPF, since the 2.4 kernel IIRC. Each computer that you
> want to take advantage of dynamic routing will need to run some sort of
> daemon. routed would work if you only want to run RIP, but for OSPF (or
> mixed OSPF/RIP) networks quagga (or http://www.zebra.org/ the core of
> quagga) is what you want.
I first wanted to use zebra. But all newer distributions I worked with
(SuSE 9.3, Debian sarge 3.1) came with quagga. So I decided to go on
with quagga. Especially because it seems to be ahead in development.

>Without the ospfd, there is nothing that would
> understand what routers are up and available and what there "costs" are,
> and nothing to change the route table.
Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. I thought may be a package like
iproute2 has a command included which can do that. And I don't like the
idea very much to install and configure that daemon on every host. But
it can be automated, so it's not a big problem.

regards
Klaus

--
Klaus Gerhardt * Holsteinische Str. 13 * 10717 Berlin
+49 (30) 8620 1523 * k-gerhardt@gmx.de
http://www.kg-it.de * http://linuxseiten.kg-it.de

Klaus Gerhardt wrote:

> matt_left_coast schrieb:
>> Linux does support OSPF, since the 2.4 kernel IIRC. Each computer that
>> you want to take advantage of dynamic routing will need to run some sort
>> of daemon. routed would work if you only want to run RIP, but for OSPF
>> (or mixed OSPF/RIP) networks quagga (or http://www.zebra.org/ the core of
>> quagga) is what you want.
> I first wanted to use zebra. But all newer distributions I worked with
> (SuSE 9.3, Debian sarge 3.1) came with quagga. So I decided to go on
> with quagga. Especially because it seems to be ahead in development.

Then you are still using zebra, quagga is built around it.

>
>>Without the ospfd, there is nothing that would
>> understand what routers are up and available and what there "costs" are,
>> and nothing to change the route table.
> Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. I thought may be a package like
> iproute2 has a command included which can do that. And I don't like the
> idea very much to install and configure that daemon on every host. But
> it can be automated, so it's not a big problem.

You would still need something to monitor the state of the network. That
would mean a daemon or a periodic cron job that needs to be configured.

>
> regards
> Klaus
>

matt_left_coast wrote:
> Klaus Gerhardt wrote:
>
>
>>matt_left_coast schrieb:
>>
>>>Linux does support OSPF, since the 2.4 kernel IIRC. Each computer that
>>>you want to take advantage of dynamic routing will need to run some sort
>>>of daemon. routed would work if you only want to run RIP, but for OSPF
>>>(or mixed OSPF/RIP) networks quagga (or http://www.zebra.org/ the core of
>>>quagga) is what you want.
>>
>>I first wanted to use zebra. But all newer distributions I worked with
>>(SuSE 9.3, Debian sarge 3.1) came with quagga. So I decided to go on
>>with quagga. Especially because it seems to be ahead in development.
>
>
> Then you are still using zebra, quagga is built around it.

Zebra (http://www.zebra.org) is mostly commercial. Last free version
was released 2003-11-27.

Quagga (http://www.quagga.net) is a *fork* of Zebra, latest release
was 2006-05-10.

Trygve Selmer wrote:

> matt_left_coast wrote:
>> Klaus Gerhardt wrote:
>>
>>
>>>matt_left_coast schrieb:
>>>
>>>>Linux does support OSPF, since the 2.4 kernel IIRC. Each computer that
>>>>you want to take advantage of dynamic routing will need to run some sort
>>>>of daemon. routed would work if you only want to run RIP, but for OSPF
>>>>(or mixed OSPF/RIP) networks quagga (or http://www.zebra.org/ the core
>>>>of quagga) is what you want.
>>>
>>>I first wanted to use zebra. But all newer distributions I worked with
>>>(SuSE 9.3, Debian sarge 3.1) came with quagga. So I decided to go on
>>>with quagga. Especially because it seems to be ahead in development.
>>
>>
>> Then you are still using zebra, quagga is built around it.
>
> Zebra (http://www.zebra.org) is mostly commercial. Last free version
> was released 2003-11-27.
>
> Quagga (http://www.quagga.net) is a *fork* of Zebra, latest release
> was 2006-05-10.

I stand corrected.

matt_left_coast wrote:

> Trygve Selmer wrote:
>

>>>
>>> Then you are still using zebra, quagga is built around it.
>>

I take the word of someone on usenet and look what happens...

>> Zebra (http://www.zebra.org) is mostly commercial. Last free version
>> was released 2003-11-27.

From http://www.zebra.org/zebra/Overview.html#Overview

"Zebra is an official GNU software and distributed under the GNU General
Public License."

(This claim is supported by " http://www.gnu.org/software/zebra/zebra.html
")

The last I checked "GNU software" is not "mostly commercial". The last I
checked GNU software IS "free" so, unless both the zebra Overview page and
the GNU Zebra page have not been updated since "2003-11-27", it looks like
a free version of zebra has been put out after 2003-11-27

>>
>> Quagga (http://www.quagga.net) is a *fork* of Zebra, latest release
>> was 2006-05-10.
>
> I stand corrected.

Then, according to http://www.quagga.net/about.php

"The Quagga architecture consists of a core daemon:
zebra"

No mention of a "fork".

I'm sorry, but the links you provided do not look like they support your
claim.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

matt_left_coast wrote:
> matt_left_coast wrote:
>
>> Trygve Selmer wrote:
>>
>
>>>> Then you are still using zebra, quagga is built around it.
>
> I take the word of someone on usenet and look what happens...
>
>>> Zebra (http://www.zebra.org) is mostly commercial. Last free version
>>> was released 2003-11-27.
>
> From http://www.zebra.org/zebra/Overview.html#Overview
>
> "Zebra is an official GNU software and distributed under the GNU General
> Public License."
>
> (This claim is supported by " http://www.gnu.org/software/zebra/zebra.html
> ")
>
> The last I checked "GNU software" is not "mostly commercial". The last I
> checked GNU software IS "free" so, unless both the zebra Overview page and
> the GNU Zebra page have not been updated since "2003-11-27", it looks like
> a free version of zebra has been put out after 2003-11-27
>
>>> Quagga (http://www.quagga.net) is a *fork* of Zebra, latest release
>>> was 2006-05-10.
>> I stand corrected.
>
> Then, according to http://www.quagga.net/about.php
>
> "The Quagga architecture consists of a core daemon:
> zebra"
>
> No mention of a "fork".
>
> I'm sorry, but the links you provided do not look like they support your
> claim.
>

You must have missed the top half of that about page, where it says...

Quagga is a routing software suite, providing implementations of
OSPFv2, OSPFv3, RIP v1 and v2, RIPv3 and BGPv4 for Unix platforms,
particularly FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris and NetBSD. Quagga is a fork of
- ---------------------------------------------------===================
GNU Zebra which was developed by Kunihiro Ishiguro
- --=========

>



- --

Lew Pitcher, IT Specialist, Corporate Technology Solutions,
Enterprise Technology Solutions, TD Bank Financial Group

(Opinions expressed here are my own, not my employer's)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEZJrtagVFX4UWr64RAgvCAJ9ndbhux1NQpku1IsjOK7 uGUOvk6wCeOsJ7
epdsMI25WYVBZNc0ctt+lE8=
=buwp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----