|       Patrick, your description of Zebra makes it sound like
|       it's almost shrink wrapped software.

Well, not quite but it is quite mature. It is definitely very functional
and I use it (zebra) quite a bit myself.  It has the advantage of using
Cisco-like syntax.

Quagga forked from Zebra last year. Using Quagga is probably a better move
than using Zebra. Mostly due to the fact that Zebra development has become
rather stagnant.

In the time I have been using Zebra (OSPF and BGP), I haven't had any
problems with it.


Best Regards,
Patrick Mackey

----------------------------------------
      "Of course it runs NetBSD"
    "NetBSD: http://www.netbsd.org"
----------------------------------------

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Conrad T. Pino wrote:

|       Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:22:20 -0800
|       From: Conrad T. Pino <NetBSD-Current@Pino.com>
|       To: NetBSD Current <current-users@netbsd.org>
|       Subject: RE: NetBSD -current/-stable & Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)
|
|       Hi Dave & Patrick,
|
|       Thanks for the pointer back to pkgsrc.  I now see that
|       NetBSD has all 3 (MRT, Quagga, Zebra) in pkgsrc/net.
|       My highest complements to the port & project teams.
|
|       Correct me if I'm wrong but I take it that both of you
|       consider the Quagga clear winner against MRT & Zebra.
|
|       Patrick, your description of Zebra makes it sound like
|       it's almost shrink wrapped software.
|
|       I want to deploy a BPG capable firewalling router into
|       a production WWW/email environment.  Does this change
|       anyone's opinion away from Quagga?
|
|       TIA,
|
|       Conrad
|
|