frr VS sc

This is incredibly funny to me, because this is almost exactly how some of our other tests work :D

(Almost: we have a full-featured command shell and just use that for testing)

Code: https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/blob/master/tests/ospf6d/te...

Input: https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/blob/master/tests/ospf6d/te...

Expected output: https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/blob/master/tests/ospf6d/te...

I don't think it's possible to get away with fundamentally no cancellation support, there are enough edge cases that need it even if most applications don't have such edge cases.

FWIW, this was also painful to do in our C event loop, but there was no way around the fact that we needed it (cf. https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/blob/56d994aecab08b9462f2c8... )

FRR https://frrouting.org/ is another open source tool for a more Cisco style CLI syntax. You’d install that on top of most Linux distros.

Use a decent PC or three, use https://frrouting.org/ and see fast bgp convergence 8-)

Open source, check out freerouter (https://wiki.geant.org/display/RARE/Home) and FRR (https://frrouting.org/)

u/GamerLymx The setup goal was, originally, to set this up as a desktop testing router using FRRouting so I could experiment with some technologies I work with, namely OpenFabric without having to buy a $6k switch (Extreme Networks) as well as OSPF and EIGRP. However, I ran into some issues with setting up FRRouting and could not find sufficient information out there to overcome those. So I decided to just turn it into a plain router using NFTables, etc., when I ran into the issues with Netplan.

Has anyone ever setup FRRouting to connect to a consumer VPN such as NordVPN? I have been Googling but have come up empty so I am assuming it is not something that can be done. Just the same, I thought I would ask in case I am asking the question wrong in my searches.

Common libraries and data structures for C\ (107 comments)

Can someone tell me what is this line from sc_signal.c:247 in sc/signal/

If the way it is used requires the user to break the abstraction/encapsulation and manually buffer some fields in order not to break the data structure and leak memory, I would call that a bug.

There is one use of sc_array_clear() in the test code [1] which really makes it look as if it is being used in a way that I think (again, I haven't single-stepped this code, only read it) leaks memory.

I agree on the pain of everything being macros, it's more pain than it's worth I think and will likely lead to code duplication (and more pain in debugging, probably).

I would even go so far as to think that this kind of single-file design, where each file is independent of the others, makes it harder and more annoying to implement more complicated data structures.

[1]: https://github.com/tezc/sc/blob/master/array/array_test.c#L3...

https://github.com/tezc/sc/tree/master/map

For those who are interested in faster hashmaps, I tried bunch of hashmaps and this one performs better than others. This is for C. Maybe C++ has better hashmaps.