Emre Yildirim wrote:

>This is kinda cool.  Theo always objected to implementing "VRRP" into OpenBSD,
>because supposedly, it was patented by Cisco and that was a bad thing or something. 
>I recently had to infect some of my machines with Linux to try out load balancing
>(LVS project), but I guess now I have a good excuse to try out this CARP feature. 
>Hopefully it will make it into NetBSD some day.
>
>
>  
>
Yes, it is patented by Cisco in the US and they require one to license 
the "technology" in order to implement HSRP/VRRP like things.  The 
patent is pretty generic and was probably granted before the US patent 
office even knew what a router was.  Nortel apparently has a VRRP patent 
in Europe as well.  I also expect to see the freevrrpd project die once 
Cisco catches wind of it.  http://www.bsdshell.net/hut_fvrrpd.html  Even 
so, a friend of mine recently got freevrrpd to work on NetBSD with some 
minor changes... e-mail me if you're interested.

I saw today that someone has already patched FreeBSD-current to support 
CARP.

I'm trying my best to force-feed it to NetBSD, but I'm still learning 
here.... so it may be done some time in 2010.  :-(

A list of the files modified in OpenBSD for CARP can be found here:
http://www.deadly.org/article.php3?sid=20031018101733

~Mike.



Once upon a time David Maxwell proclaimed:

>>On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 03:51:33PM -0500, Michael Hertrick wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>In case you hadn't heard, OpenBSD has a new protocol in -current called
>>>CARP (Common Address Redundancy Protocol) to facilitate automatic
>>>failover and load-balancing.
>>>http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=carp&sektion=4
>>>
>>>This is great news to me, a networker who has wanted these features for
>>>my BSD routers, firewalls, and servers for years.  It would be even
>>>greater news if CARP was incorporated into NetBSD.
>>>      
>>>
>>Neat.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Will NetBSD implement CARP in the future, or some other VRRP
>>>alternative?  Or, is CARP still too young and volatile to consider for
>>>NetBSD?
>>>      
>>>
>>Hopefully, things don't get refused for inclusion in NetBSD because of
>>age.
>>
>>Quality/Stability, and Design Goals might not be compatible - those are
>>the actual reasons. People could misinterpret them as 'ageism'.
>>
>>If the design makes sense, and someone is interested in working on it,
>>it could well be pulled into NetBSD sooner rather than later. The
>>simpler explanation is that, since it seems to have been committed
>>around Oct 16, no NetBSD developers have noticed, or had time to
>>investigate it yet.
>>
>>--
>>David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net -->
>>(About an Amiga rendering landscapes) It's not thinking, it's being artistic!
>>					      - Jamie Woods
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>