Re: removing RIP/RIPng (routed/route6d)

In message <Zh2JpNbUa5_T0QiA@ilythia.eden.le-fay.org>, Lexi Winter writes:
> 
> --YwhyjZXuuh/1LhYW
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> hello,
>
> currently FreeBSD ships routed(8) and route6d(8) which implement the RIP
> resp. RIPng routing protocols.
>
> many years ago, it was fairly common for hosts to run these protocols to
> get their routing table and it made sense to ship an implementation with
> the operating systems.
>
> nowadays, these are fairly niche protocols and have been replaced in
> most networks by either static routing tables (mostly just a default
> route) or more modern routing protocols like IBGP/EBGP, OSPF or IS-IS.
> as such, i'm not convinced there's any value continuing to ship these
> with the OS.
>
> for people who do want to continue running RIP/RIPng, there are several
> implementations available in ports, such as net/bird2 and net/quagga.
>
> i'd like to submit a patch to remove both of these daemons from src.  if
> there's some concern that people still want to use the BSD
> implementation of routed/route6d, i'm also willing to submit a port such
> as net/freebsd-routed containing the old code, in a similar way to how
> the removal of things like window(1) and telnetd(8) were handled.
>
> does anyone have an opinion on this?

If a port, the source repo must contain full history extracted from our src 
tree like I did with our telnetd and ftpd extracts.


-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy@FreeBSD.org>   Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
NTP:           <cy@nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org

			e^(i*pi)+1=0