-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 714
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Assign static route to gateway group #3947
Comments
For static routing we're constraint by what route(8) has to offer (https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?route), policy based routing is a different concept using pf's route-to constructs. When opening future tickets, please consider using our templates, this avoids incomplete labels and increases the chances of receiving feedback. |
The policies already exist otherwise though. Gateway reliability is already tracked via dpinger. Gateway groups already take this status information into consideration. I don't think it would be that hard to add a hook into the way gateway groups already handles this to add/remove static routes based on gateway availability. Unless you're suggesting that these hooks don't even exist in the first place? And that anything and everything gateway groups currently does is handled at the lower os/service layer? |
Members of a group can share traffic (see Unfortunately FreeBSD doesn't support route metrics, which might be a fit without trashing the routing table on every disruption. |
This issue has been automatically timed-out (after 180 days of inactivity). For more information about the policies for this repository, If someone wants to step up and work on this issue, |
Pretty simple concept (maybe complex to implement?)
Allow assigning a static route to a gateway group rather than just a single gateway. This way if a particular gateway goes down (or is still up but has high latency or high packet loss), the static route will shift to the backup gateway.
And down the line, this would be a first step into getting static route ECMP as well (that'll be another ticket for another day tho)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: