https://lists.gt.net/quagga/users/13318
Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
On Zebra, I have this in my config:
interface eth1:1
link-detect
ipv6 nd suppress-ra
!
show interface shows:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
If I then do a "no shutdown" on this interface from Zebra, I get:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
So it has added "line protocol is up" despite the interface not being
shutdown before. Now I tried shutting the interface down via Zebra, but it
still said:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
I noticed that it had shutdown the interface though. I tried:
# no shutdown
Can't up interface
Then restarting Quagga and show interface now showed:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
I still can't unshut it down though.
In zebra.log I get this when I try and do a no shutdown:
2007/02/26 12:27:06 ZEBRA: can't set interface flags
Am I doing something wrong, or are virtual interfaces just not supported?
Or has support been added / fixed since version 0.98.3?
Any suggestions?
Many thanks,
Seb
2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
On Zebra, I have this in my config:
interface eth1:1
link-detect
ipv6 nd suppress-ra
!
show interface shows:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
If I then do a "no shutdown" on this interface from Zebra, I get:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
So it has added "line protocol is up" despite the interface not being
shutdown before. Now I tried shutting the interface down via Zebra, but it
still said:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
I noticed that it had shutdown the interface though. I tried:
# no shutdown
Can't up interface
Then restarting Quagga and show interface now showed:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
I still can't unshut it down though.
In zebra.log I get this when I try and do a no shutdown:
2007/02/26 12:27:06 ZEBRA: can't set interface flags
Am I doing something wrong, or are virtual interfaces just not supported?
Or has support been added / fixed since version 0.98.3?
Any suggestions?
Many thanks,
Seb
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Hi, atleast I have quagga running on machine with subinterfaces.
Distributing routes with ospf and bgp and everything works fine. Didn't do
enything special compared to normal subinterface configs when deployiong
quagga so I think there something else wrong with your config. What linux
are you using?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
>
> On Zebra, I have this in my config:
>
> interface eth1:1
> link-detect
> ipv6 nd suppress-ra
> !
>
> show interface shows:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is down
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> If I then do a "no shutdown" on this interface from Zebra, I get:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> So it has added "line protocol is up" despite the interface not being
> shutdown before. Now I tried shutting the interface down via Zebra, but it
> still said:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> I noticed that it had shutdown the interface though. I tried:
>
> # no shutdown
> Can't up interface
>
> Then restarting Quagga and show interface now showed:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is down
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> I still can't unshut it down though.
>
> In zebra.log I get this when I try and do a no shutdown:
> 2007/02/26 12:27:06 ZEBRA: can't set interface flags
>
> Am I doing something wrong, or are virtual interfaces just not supported?
> Or has support been added / fixed since version 0.98.3?
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Seb
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-users mailing list
> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>
>
Distributing routes with ospf and bgp and everything works fine. Didn't do
enything special compared to normal subinterface configs when deployiong
quagga so I think there something else wrong with your config. What linux
are you using?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
>
> On Zebra, I have this in my config:
>
> interface eth1:1
> link-detect
> ipv6 nd suppress-ra
> !
>
> show interface shows:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is down
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> If I then do a "no shutdown" on this interface from Zebra, I get:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> So it has added "line protocol is up" despite the interface not being
> shutdown before. Now I tried shutting the interface down via Zebra, but it
> still said:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> I noticed that it had shutdown the interface though. I tried:
>
> # no shutdown
> Can't up interface
>
> Then restarting Quagga and show interface now showed:
>
> Interface eth1:1 is down
> index -1 inactive interface
>
> I still can't unshut it down though.
>
> In zebra.log I get this when I try and do a no shutdown:
> 2007/02/26 12:27:06 ZEBRA: can't set interface flags
>
> Am I doing something wrong, or are virtual interfaces just not supported?
> Or has support been added / fixed since version 0.98.3?
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Seb
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-users mailing list
> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>
>
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Good to know it is working for you.
As I said (but more detail now), Linux version 2.6.16-2-686 (Debian
2.6.16-18) ... (Debian 4.0.3-6)
What are the names of your subinterfaces?
This may be relevant to my situation: eth1:1 didn't appear in ifconfig, so
I tried the following:
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> sudo ifup eth1:1
ifup: interface eth1:1 already configured
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> sudo ifdown eth1:1
SIOCSIFFLAGS: Cannot assign requested address
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> sudo ifup eth1:1
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> Error : Name or service not known
Error : Name or service not known
Error : Name or service not known
Now eth1:1 appears in ifconfig and starts working again. (The same
behaviour applies to eth1:2 BTW.)
Maybe I'll try this (virtual interfaces with Quagga) in Fedora...
Thanks.
Seb
_____
From: Pete [mailto:nyfors@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 February 2007 14:34
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Hi, atleast I have quagga running on machine with subinterfaces.
Distributing routes with ospf and bgp and everything works fine. Didn't do
enything special compared to normal subinterface configs when deployiong
quagga so I think there something else wrong with your config. What linux
are you using?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
On Zebra, I have this in my config:
interface eth1:1
link-detect
ipv6 nd suppress-ra
!
show interface shows:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
If I then do a "no shutdown" on this interface from Zebra, I get:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
So it has added "line protocol is up" despite the interface not being
shutdown before. Now I tried shutting the interface down via Zebra, but it
still said:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
I noticed that it had shutdown the interface though. I tried:
# no shutdown
Can't up interface
Then restarting Quagga and show interface now showed:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
I still can't unshut it down though.
In zebra.log I get this when I try and do a no shutdown:
2007/02/26 12:27:06 ZEBRA: can't set interface flags
Am I doing something wrong, or are virtual interfaces just not supported?
Or has support been added / fixed since version 0.98.3?
Any suggestions?
Many thanks,
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
As I said (but more detail now), Linux version 2.6.16-2-686 (Debian
2.6.16-18) ... (Debian 4.0.3-6)
What are the names of your subinterfaces?
This may be relevant to my situation: eth1:1 didn't appear in ifconfig, so
I tried the following:
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> sudo ifup eth1:1
ifup: interface eth1:1 already configured
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> sudo ifdown eth1:1
SIOCSIFFLAGS: Cannot assign requested address
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> sudo ifup eth1:1
$ <mailto:seb@thegw1:/etc/network$> Error : Name or service not known
Error : Name or service not known
Error : Name or service not known
Now eth1:1 appears in ifconfig and starts working again. (The same
behaviour applies to eth1:2 BTW.)
Maybe I'll try this (virtual interfaces with Quagga) in Fedora...
Thanks.
Seb
_____
From: Pete [mailto:nyfors@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 February 2007 14:34
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Hi, atleast I have quagga running on machine with subinterfaces.
Distributing routes with ospf and bgp and everything works fine. Didn't do
enything special compared to normal subinterface configs when deployiong
quagga so I think there something else wrong with your config. What linux
are you using?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
On Zebra, I have this in my config:
interface eth1:1
link-detect
ipv6 nd suppress-ra
!
show interface shows:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
If I then do a "no shutdown" on this interface from Zebra, I get:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
So it has added "line protocol is up" despite the interface not being
shutdown before. Now I tried shutting the interface down via Zebra, but it
still said:
Interface eth1:1 is up, line protocol is up
index -1 inactive interface
I noticed that it had shutdown the interface though. I tried:
# no shutdown
Can't up interface
Then restarting Quagga and show interface now showed:
Interface eth1:1 is down
index -1 inactive interface
I still can't unshut it down though.
In zebra.log I get this when I try and do a no shutdown:
2007/02/26 12:27:06 ZEBRA: can't set interface flags
Am I doing something wrong, or are virtual interfaces just not supported?
Or has support been added / fixed since version 0.98.3?
Any suggestions?
Many thanks,
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Dnia poniedzia³ek, 26 lutego 2007, Seb napisa³(a):
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
There is no such thing as virtual interfaces or aliases in Linux for may years
now. It was working this way on 2.2 (or 2.0?) kernels. Try to list your
interfaces and addresses with `ip address list` and it will show you real
interfaces - and probably the ones which quagga is seeing.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
There is no such thing as virtual interfaces or aliases in Linux for may years
now. It was working this way on 2.2 (or 2.0?) kernels. Try to list your
interfaces and addresses with `ip address list` and it will show you real
interfaces - and probably the ones which quagga is seeing.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
OK. They are listed so:
$ ip addr show eth1 (some stuff x'ed out)
3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1600 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000
link/ether 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet xxx.xxx.136.50/29 brd xxx.xxx.136.55 scope global eth1
inet xx.xxx.1.1/26 brd xx.xxx.1.63 scope global eth1:1
inet xx.xxx.0.130/30 brd xx.xxx.0.131 scope global eth1:2
inet6 xxxx::xxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
And now that I look at "show interface" again on the zebra interface, I see
that all 3 IP addresses are listed on eth1, so my bad there. So I removed
the config from zebra for eth1:1 and eth1:2.
However, that doesn't bring me much closer to getting OSPF and BGP working
on these two additional networks corresponding to eth1:1 and eth1:2...
(What does one call them if not a virtual interface or an alias now then?)
Thanks, Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Kajetan Staszkiewicz [mailto:vegeta@tuxpowered.net]
Sent: 26 February 2007 16:56
To: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Cc: Seb
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Dnia poniedzia³ek, 26 lutego 2007, Seb napisa³(a):
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
There is no such thing as virtual interfaces or aliases in Linux for may
years
now. It was working this way on 2.2 (or 2.0?) kernels. Try to list your
interfaces and addresses with `ip address list` and it will show you real
interfaces - and probably the ones which quagga is seeing.
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
$ ip addr show eth1 (some stuff x'ed out)
3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1600 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000
link/ether 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet xxx.xxx.136.50/29 brd xxx.xxx.136.55 scope global eth1
inet xx.xxx.1.1/26 brd xx.xxx.1.63 scope global eth1:1
inet xx.xxx.0.130/30 brd xx.xxx.0.131 scope global eth1:2
inet6 xxxx::xxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
And now that I look at "show interface" again on the zebra interface, I see
that all 3 IP addresses are listed on eth1, so my bad there. So I removed
the config from zebra for eth1:1 and eth1:2.
However, that doesn't bring me much closer to getting OSPF and BGP working
on these two additional networks corresponding to eth1:1 and eth1:2...
(What does one call them if not a virtual interface or an alias now then?)
Thanks, Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Kajetan Staszkiewicz [mailto:vegeta@tuxpowered.net]
Sent: 26 February 2007 16:56
To: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Cc: Seb
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Dnia poniedzia³ek, 26 lutego 2007, Seb napisa³(a):
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
There is no such thing as virtual interfaces or aliases in Linux for may
years
now. It was working this way on 2.2 (or 2.0?) kernels. Try to list your
interfaces and addresses with `ip address list` and it will show you real
interfaces - and probably the ones which quagga is seeing.
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
>
> On Zebra, I have this in my config:
>
> interface eth1:1
Change this to 'eth1'.
There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
(presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
tools like ifconfig to work.
Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
addresses attached to them..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Walk softly and carry a big stick.
-- Theodore Roosevelt
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> Are virtual interfaces supported on Quagga v0.98.3 (on Debian GNU/Linux
> 2.6.16)? (Zebra, OSPF and BGP)
>
> On Zebra, I have this in my config:
>
> interface eth1:1
Change this to 'eth1'.
There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
(presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
tools like ifconfig to work.
Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
addresses attached to them..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Walk softly and carry a big stick.
-- Theodore Roosevelt
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message, where I
removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the night.
However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more networks
than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote location). OSPF and
BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure how to separate out the BGP
config for one label compared to another label for eth1.
Thanks.
Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
Sent: 26 February 2007 17:46
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Change this to 'eth1'.
There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
(presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
tools like ifconfig to work.
Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
addresses attached to them..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the night.
However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more networks
than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote location). OSPF and
BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure how to separate out the BGP
config for one label compared to another label for eth1.
Thanks.
Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
Sent: 26 February 2007 17:46
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Change this to 'eth1'.
There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
(presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
tools like ifconfig to work.
Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
addresses attached to them..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
How have you created the interfaces? Have you used vconfig?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message, where I
> removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the night.
>
> However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more networks
> than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote location). OSPF
> and
> BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure how to separate out the BGP
> config for one label compared to another label for eth1.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Seb
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
> Sent: 26 February 2007 17:46
> To: Seb
> Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
>
> Change this to 'eth1'.
>
> There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
> (presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
> ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
> tools like ifconfig to work.
>
> Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
> addresses attached to them..
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-users mailing list
> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message, where I
> removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the night.
>
> However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more networks
> than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote location). OSPF
> and
> BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure how to separate out the BGP
> config for one label compared to another label for eth1.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Seb
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
> Sent: 26 February 2007 17:46
> To: Seb
> Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
>
> Change this to 'eth1'.
>
> There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
> (presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
> ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
> tools like ifconfig to work.
>
> Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
> addresses attached to them..
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-users mailing list
> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
> Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message,
> where I removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the
> night.
Perhaps. Removing it / changing it to 'eth1' is step 1 though ;).
> However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more
> networks than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote
> location). OSPF and BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure
> how to separate out the BGP config for one label compared to
> another label for eth1.
You're confused between interfaces and addresses.
A single interface can have multiple addresses (on many systems).
Systems which assign unique psuedo-interface names to each address
configured to an interface nearly always do so for
backwards-compatibility reasons (e.g. in your Linux case, to retain
compatibility with ifconfig/IFCONF).
Regardless though, interfaces and addresses are different things,
trying to think of the latter as being equivalent to the former is
senseless (e.g. BGP cares little about interfaces, it cares about
/addresses/).
And regardless of the system, Quagga models (tries hard) addresses as
being /addresses/, and tries to avoid treating psuedo-interfaces as
actual interfaces (cause they're not, and trying to do so usually
leads to bigger problems)..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
A feature is nothing more than a bug with seniority.
-- Unknown source
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message,
> where I removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the
> night.
Perhaps. Removing it / changing it to 'eth1' is step 1 though ;).
> However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more
> networks than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote
> location). OSPF and BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure
> how to separate out the BGP config for one label compared to
> another label for eth1.
You're confused between interfaces and addresses.
A single interface can have multiple addresses (on many systems).
Systems which assign unique psuedo-interface names to each address
configured to an interface nearly always do so for
backwards-compatibility reasons (e.g. in your Linux case, to retain
compatibility with ifconfig/IFCONF).
Regardless though, interfaces and addresses are different things,
trying to think of the latter as being equivalent to the former is
senseless (e.g. BGP cares little about interfaces, it cares about
/addresses/).
And regardless of the system, Quagga models (tries hard) addresses as
being /addresses/, and tries to avoid treating psuedo-interfaces as
actual interfaces (cause they're not, and trying to do so usually
leads to bigger problems)..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
A feature is nothing more than a bug with seniority.
-- Unknown source
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Er no. I just edited /etc/network/interfaces (as per
http://handsonhowto.com/virt.html) and restarted the network.
Here is an extract:
auto eth1
iface eth1 inet static
address xxx.xxx.136.50
netmask 255.255.255.248
network xxx.xxx.136.48
broadcast xxx.xxx.136.55
post-up /sbin/ifconfig eth1 mtu 1600
auto eth1:1
iface eth1:1 inet static
address xx.xxx.1.1
netmask 255.255.255.192
network xx.xxx.1.0
broadcast xx.xxx.1.63
auto eth1:2
iface eth1:2 inet static
address xx.xxx.0.130
netmask xxx.xxx.255.252
network xx.xxx.0.128
broadcast xx.xxx.0.131
Is this bad? :-) There is a lot of out-of-date information on the web, and
I don't usually use Debian.
Seb
_____
From: Pete [mailto:nyfors@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 February 2007 18:23
To: Seb
Cc: Paul Jakma; quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8077] Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
How have you created the interfaces? Have you used vconfig?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message, where I
removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the night.
However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more networks
than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote location). OSPF and
BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure how to separate out the BGP
config for one label compared to another label for eth1.
Thanks.
Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
Sent: 26 February 2007 17:46
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Change this to 'eth1'.
There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
(presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
tools like ifconfig to work.
Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
addresses attached to them..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie <mailto:paul@clubi.ie> paul@jakma.org Key
ID: 64A2FF6A
http://handsonhowto.com/virt.html) and restarted the network.
Here is an extract:
auto eth1
iface eth1 inet static
address xxx.xxx.136.50
netmask 255.255.255.248
network xxx.xxx.136.48
broadcast xxx.xxx.136.55
post-up /sbin/ifconfig eth1 mtu 1600
auto eth1:1
iface eth1:1 inet static
address xx.xxx.1.1
netmask 255.255.255.192
network xx.xxx.1.0
broadcast xx.xxx.1.63
auto eth1:2
iface eth1:2 inet static
address xx.xxx.0.130
netmask xxx.xxx.255.252
network xx.xxx.0.128
broadcast xx.xxx.0.131
Is this bad? :-) There is a lot of out-of-date information on the web, and
I don't usually use Debian.
Seb
_____
From: Pete [mailto:nyfors@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 February 2007 18:23
To: Seb
Cc: Paul Jakma; quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8077] Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
How have you created the interfaces? Have you used vconfig?
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
Thanks for the response. I think your message and my last message, where I
removed eth1:1 from zebra.conf, passed like ships in the night.
However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more networks
than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote location). OSPF and
BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure how to separate out the BGP
config for one label compared to another label for eth1.
Thanks.
Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
Sent: 26 February 2007 17:46
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: Re: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
Change this to 'eth1'.
There is no such thing on Linux 2.4+ as a 'eth1:X' interface
(presuming an "eth1" interface exists with same ifindex, as seen by
ifconfig). It's just a label attached to an address to allow older
tools like ifconfig to work.
Type 'show interface' to see zebra's view of interfaces and the
addresses attached to them..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie <mailto:paul@clubi.ie> paul@jakma.org Key
ID: 64A2FF6A
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Unfortunately I'm not confused about interfaces and addresses. It's just
that the way the Quagga commands are set-up they seem to be aimed at
interfaces rather than addresses. For example, the command is "show ip ospf
interface" and not "show ip ospf address". Now, I can well understand that
the former might make more sense, and it could well be that Quagga has
understood all the configured addresses and that ospf is actually working
fine (unfortunately the person maintaining this system has left and I have
to try and figure it out). However, BGP is not establishing between the
nodes of our network (but it is establishing with external networks) ever
since I had to disable an interface that was not working properly and move
its address to a secondary address on a different interface (which ought to
work as both interfaces are plugged into the same managed switching hub -
and indeed they can ping / connect to each other fine).
I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted to check
if it was supported.
Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
Sent: 26 February 2007 18:39
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: RE: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
> However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more
> networks than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote
> location). OSPF and BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure
> how to separate out the BGP config for one label compared to
> another label for eth1.
You're confused between interfaces and addresses.
A single interface can have multiple addresses (on many systems).
Systems which assign unique psuedo-interface names to each address
configured to an interface nearly always do so for
backwards-compatibility reasons (e.g. in your Linux case, to retain
compatibility with ifconfig/IFCONF).
Regardless though, interfaces and addresses are different things,
trying to think of the latter as being equivalent to the former is
senseless (e.g. BGP cares little about interfaces, it cares about
/addresses/).
And regardless of the system, Quagga models (tries hard) addresses as
being /addresses/, and tries to avoid treating psuedo-interfaces as
actual interfaces (cause they're not, and trying to do so usually
leads to bigger problems)..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
that the way the Quagga commands are set-up they seem to be aimed at
interfaces rather than addresses. For example, the command is "show ip ospf
interface" and not "show ip ospf address". Now, I can well understand that
the former might make more sense, and it could well be that Quagga has
understood all the configured addresses and that ospf is actually working
fine (unfortunately the person maintaining this system has left and I have
to try and figure it out). However, BGP is not establishing between the
nodes of our network (but it is establishing with external networks) ever
since I had to disable an interface that was not working properly and move
its address to a secondary address on a different interface (which ought to
work as both interfaces are plugged into the same managed switching hub -
and indeed they can ping / connect to each other fine).
I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted to check
if it was supported.
Seb
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
Sent: 26 February 2007 18:39
To: Seb
Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
Subject: RE: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
> However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more
> networks than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote
> location). OSPF and BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure
> how to separate out the BGP config for one label compared to
> another label for eth1.
You're confused between interfaces and addresses.
A single interface can have multiple addresses (on many systems).
Systems which assign unique psuedo-interface names to each address
configured to an interface nearly always do so for
backwards-compatibility reasons (e.g. in your Linux case, to retain
compatibility with ifconfig/IFCONF).
Regardless though, interfaces and addresses are different things,
trying to think of the latter as being equivalent to the former is
senseless (e.g. BGP cares little about interfaces, it cares about
/addresses/).
And regardless of the system, Quagga models (tries hard) addresses as
being /addresses/, and tries to avoid treating psuedo-interfaces as
actual interfaces (cause they're not, and trying to do so usually
leads to bigger problems)..
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
> I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
> multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted
> to check if it was supported.
It is.
You may want to supply your configs, so readers can sanity check.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
QOTD:
"If you keep an open mind people will throw a lot of garbage in it."
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
> multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted
> to check if it was supported.
It is.
You may want to supply your configs, so readers can sanity check.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
QOTD:
"If you keep an open mind people will throw a lot of garbage in it."
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Here is how i've done it with vlans and it works.
--->
modprobe 8021q
vconfig add eth1 2
ifconfig eth1.2 10.0.0.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
vconfig add eth1 3
ifconfig eth1.3 10.0.1.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
ifconfig eth1.2 up
ifconfig eth1.3 up
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately I'm not confused about interfaces and addresses. It's just
> that the way the Quagga commands are set-up they seem to be aimed at
> interfaces rather than addresses. For example, the command is "show ip
> ospf
> interface" and not "show ip ospf address". Now, I can well understand that
> the former might make more sense, and it could well be that Quagga has
> understood all the configured addresses and that ospf is actually working
> fine (unfortunately the person maintaining this system has left and I have
> to try and figure it out). However, BGP is not establishing between the
> nodes of our network (but it is establishing with external networks) ever
> since I had to disable an interface that was not working properly and move
> its address to a secondary address on a different interface (which ought
> to
> work as both interfaces are plugged into the same managed switching hub -
> and indeed they can ping / connect to each other fine).
>
> I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
> multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted to
> check
> if it was supported.
>
> Seb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
> Sent: 26 February 2007 18:39
> To: Seb
> Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> Subject: RE: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
>
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
>
> > However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more
> > networks than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote
> > location). OSPF and BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure
> > how to separate out the BGP config for one label compared to
> > another label for eth1.
>
> You're confused between interfaces and addresses.
>
> A single interface can have multiple addresses (on many systems).
>
> Systems which assign unique psuedo-interface names to each address
> configured to an interface nearly always do so for
> backwards-compatibility reasons (e.g. in your Linux case, to retain
> compatibility with ifconfig/IFCONF).
>
> Regardless though, interfaces and addresses are different things,
> trying to think of the latter as being equivalent to the former is
> senseless (e.g. BGP cares little about interfaces, it cares about
> /addresses/).
>
> And regardless of the system, Quagga models (tries hard) addresses as
> being /addresses/, and tries to avoid treating psuedo-interfaces as
> actual interfaces (cause they're not, and trying to do so usually
> leads to bigger problems)..
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-users mailing list
> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>
--->
modprobe 8021q
vconfig add eth1 2
ifconfig eth1.2 10.0.0.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
vconfig add eth1 3
ifconfig eth1.3 10.0.1.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
ifconfig eth1.2 up
ifconfig eth1.3 up
~pete
On 2/26/07, Seb <sebqu@syntec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately I'm not confused about interfaces and addresses. It's just
> that the way the Quagga commands are set-up they seem to be aimed at
> interfaces rather than addresses. For example, the command is "show ip
> ospf
> interface" and not "show ip ospf address". Now, I can well understand that
> the former might make more sense, and it could well be that Quagga has
> understood all the configured addresses and that ospf is actually working
> fine (unfortunately the person maintaining this system has left and I have
> to try and figure it out). However, BGP is not establishing between the
> nodes of our network (but it is establishing with external networks) ever
> since I had to disable an interface that was not working properly and move
> its address to a secondary address on a different interface (which ought
> to
> work as both interfaces are plugged into the same managed switching hub -
> and indeed they can ping / connect to each other fine).
>
> I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
> multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted to
> check
> if it was supported.
>
> Seb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Jakma [mailto:paul@clubi.ie]
> Sent: 26 February 2007 18:39
> To: Seb
> Cc: quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> Subject: RE: [quagga-users 8069] Virtual interfaces / aliases supported?
>
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Seb wrote:
>
> > However, just to clarify, I want to be able to run BGP over more
> > networks than I have physical interfaces (plugged in at a remote
> > location). OSPF and BGP are already running over eth1. I'm unsure
> > how to separate out the BGP config for one label compared to
> > another label for eth1.
>
> You're confused between interfaces and addresses.
>
> A single interface can have multiple addresses (on many systems).
>
> Systems which assign unique psuedo-interface names to each address
> configured to an interface nearly always do so for
> backwards-compatibility reasons (e.g. in your Linux case, to retain
> compatibility with ifconfig/IFCONF).
>
> Regardless though, interfaces and addresses are different things,
> trying to think of the latter as being equivalent to the former is
> senseless (e.g. BGP cares little about interfaces, it cares about
> /addresses/).
>
> And regardless of the system, Quagga models (tries hard) addresses as
> being /addresses/, and tries to avoid treating psuedo-interfaces as
> actual interfaces (cause they're not, and trying to do so usually
> leads to bigger problems)..
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-users mailing list
> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
> http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Dnia wtorek, 27 lutego 2007, Pete napisa³(a):
> Here is how i've done it with vlans and it works.
> --->
> modprobe 8021q
> vconfig add eth1 2
> ifconfig eth1.2 10.0.0.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
> vconfig add eth1 3
> ifconfig eth1.3 10.0.1.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
> ifconfig eth1.2 up
> ifconfig eth1.3 up
VLANs are also a good aproach to this, but you need to be sure that your
equipment (NICs, switches) will work correctly with them. Ofcourse with nice
manageable switches there will be much more fun to do ;)
PS.
Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> Here is how i've done it with vlans and it works.
> --->
> modprobe 8021q
> vconfig add eth1 2
> ifconfig eth1.2 10.0.0.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
> vconfig add eth1 3
> ifconfig eth1.3 10.0.1.254 netmask 255.255.255.0
> ifconfig eth1.2 up
> ifconfig eth1.3 up
VLANs are also a good aproach to this, but you need to be sure that your
equipment (NICs, switches) will work correctly with them. Ofcourse with nice
manageable switches there will be much more fun to do ;)
PS.
Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Dnia poniedzia³ek, 26 lutego 2007, Seb napisa³(a):
> which ought to
> work as both interfaces are plugged into the same managed switching hub -
> and indeed they can ping / connect to each other fine).
Be careful with multiple intefaces of single machine belonging to same
ethernet network, there are some bad suprises with ARP awainting...
> I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
> multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted to
> check if it was supported.
Remember that you enable OSPF on an interface by using 'network' command with
network address used on that interface. If you have multiple addresses on
single interface, use mutiple 'network' commands.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> which ought to
> work as both interfaces are plugged into the same managed switching hub -
> and indeed they can ping / connect to each other fine).
Be careful with multiple intefaces of single machine belonging to same
ethernet network, there are some bad suprises with ARP awainting...
> I'm sorry - I'm pretty new to Quagga as you've guessed. Maybe the
> multiple-ip address thing is a red herring, but that's why I wanted to
> check if it was supported.
Remember that you enable OSPF on an interface by using 'network' command with
network address used on that interface. If you have multiple addresses on
single interface, use mutiple 'network' commands.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Thanks everyone for all their help. I will be trying out your suggestions
soon, but I'm not sure exactly when I have some more urgent stuff at the
moment.
Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> PS.
> Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of it) and it
doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I could probably use
a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll look into it.
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
soon, but I'm not sure exactly when I have some more urgent stuff at the
moment.
Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> PS.
> Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of it) and it
doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I could probably use
a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll look into it.
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 11:41:26AM -0000, Seb wrote:
> Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> > PS.
> > Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
>
> Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of it) and it
> doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I could probably use
> a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll look into it.
This is reported to work quite well in fixing Outlook:
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
However, I don't use Outlook myself, so I can't guarantee anything.
--
Charles Briscoe-Smith Hacking Free Software for fun and profit
Mead error: Connection reset by beer. -- seen on IRC
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> > PS.
> > Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
>
> Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of it) and it
> doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I could probably use
> a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll look into it.
This is reported to work quite well in fixing Outlook:
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
However, I don't use Outlook myself, so I can't guarantee anything.
--
Charles Briscoe-Smith Hacking Free Software for fun and profit
Mead error: Connection reset by beer. -- seen on IRC
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 11:41:26AM -0000, Seb wrote:
> Thanks everyone for all their help. I will be trying out your suggestions
> soon, but I'm not sure exactly when I have some more urgent stuff at the
> moment.
>
> Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> > PS.
> > Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
>
> Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of it) and it
> doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I could probably use
> a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll look into it.
Sure it does. It's called cursor keys and/or clicking with the mouse.
It certainly has options for quating style, and as long as it quotes
properly with indenting rather than just a header above the quoted text,
then moving to the right place to reply is simple.
Lazyness is no excuse. :)
--
Len Sorensen
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> Thanks everyone for all their help. I will be trying out your suggestions
> soon, but I'm not sure exactly when I have some more urgent stuff at the
> moment.
>
> Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> > PS.
> > Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
>
> Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of it) and it
> doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I could probably use
> a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll look into it.
Sure it does. It's called cursor keys and/or clicking with the mouse.
It certainly has options for quating style, and as long as it quotes
properly with indenting rather than just a header above the quoted text,
then moving to the right place to reply is simple.
Lazyness is no excuse. :)
--
Len Sorensen
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
> From: Lennart Sorensen
> > Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> > > PS.
> > > Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
> >
> > Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or
> most of it) and it
> > doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I
> could probably use
> > a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll
> look into it.
>
> Sure it does. It's called cursor keys and/or clicking with the mouse.
> It certainly has options for quating style, and as long as it quotes
> properly with indenting rather than just a header above the
> quoted text,
> then moving to the right place to reply is simple.
Well I know Outlook does have some options for quoting style but I need
something that works with HTML, rich text and plain text e-mails, and I had
it set to indent the original message text (which is what I prefer) and this
doesn't work with plain text e-mails, which this mailing list uses. However,
I've changed Outlook to use prefixing and this works for plain text and
bizarrely still indents for HTML and rich text e-mails, so this seems to be
the best option - I get the best of both worlds. Thanks for encouraging me
to experiment though.
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
> > Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
> > > PS.
> > > Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
> >
> > Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or
> most of it) and it
> > doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I
> could probably use
> > a different e-mail client for mailing lists though... I'll
> look into it.
>
> Sure it does. It's called cursor keys and/or clicking with the mouse.
> It certainly has options for quating style, and as long as it quotes
> properly with indenting rather than just a header above the
> quoted text,
> then moving to the right place to reply is simple.
Well I know Outlook does have some options for quoting style but I need
something that works with HTML, rich text and plain text e-mails, and I had
it set to indent the original message text (which is what I prefer) and this
doesn't work with plain text e-mails, which this mailing list uses. However,
I've changed Outlook to use prefixing and this works for plain text and
bizarrely still indents for HTML and rich text e-mails, so this seems to be
the best option - I get the best of both worlds. Thanks for encouraging me
to experiment though.
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
Re: Virtual interfaces / aliases supported? [
In reply to ]
Charles Briscoe-Smith wrote:
quagga-users-bounces@lists.quagga.net <> scribbled on :
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 11:41:26AM -0000, Seb wrote:
>> Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
>>> PS.
>>> Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
>>
>> Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of
>> it) and it doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I
>> could probably use a different e-mail client for mailing lists
>> though... I'll look into it.
>
> This is reported to work quite well in fixing Outlook:
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
>
> However, I don't use Outlook myself, so I can't guarantee anything.
Thanks! I'm trying Outlook-QuoteFix now and it does seem to work pretty well
except for the header line (which is fairly customisable, but doesn't seem
to work too well for this mailing list (see the scribbled header above)).
Even so, it is an improvement over the standard Outlook quoting for plain
text messages.
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
quagga-users-bounces@lists.quagga.net <> scribbled on :
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 11:41:26AM -0000, Seb wrote:
>> Kajetan Staszkiewicz wrote:
>>> PS.
>>> Please do not toppost. It really makes your posts hard to read.
>>
>> Unfortunately I have to use Outlook (2003) for e-mail (or most of
>> it) and it doesn't seem to have any alternatives to top-posting. I
>> could probably use a different e-mail client for mailing lists
>> though... I'll look into it.
>
> This is reported to work quite well in fixing Outlook:
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
>
> However, I don't use Outlook myself, so I can't guarantee anything.
Thanks! I'm trying Outlook-QuoteFix now and it does seem to work pretty well
except for the header line (which is fairly customisable, but doesn't seem
to work too well for this mailing list (see the scribbled header above)).
Even so, it is an improvement over the standard Outlook quoting for plain
text messages.
Seb
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
http://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users