And what good would suing do? It certainly wouldnt get the problem fixed.
I dont quite understand this mentality of corporations "linux doesnt have
anyone to sue, so we cant use it". Name any corporation that has ever
successfully sued Microsoft over a bug, and came out ahead. I think I can
count the number of companies on no hands.
> >I wasnt aware MacOS spoke RIPv2.
> Quite True - The Macs really weren't involved.
> BUT using "Whatroute" ON A MAC as well as various tests from the Unix boxes
> proved to us that the routers didn't function satisfactorily.
In what way specifically. Our ciscos are happily RIPv2'ing away with
various devices and terminal servers on our network.
Ive always found the fault with routing not to be on Ciscos end but on
the 3rd party hardware which didnt quite speak RIPv2 properly. But it was
always possible to configure the Cisco to more or less accomodate broken
implementations.
> >> In the end we dumped the Cisco's routers, rationalised to Class B addresses
> >> and went to asante switches and used Unix to route everything else - fixed
> >> it!
> >Thats called swatting a fly with a sledgehammer, I believe. (Other people
> >would call it a kludge).
> Yes, but it eliminated routing altogether. Each client effectively did their
> own as did the Unix boxes. On top of that we load spread the various clients
> and lowered the load on the 2 backbones. Yes, cost a fortune but it
> stopped me from going grey!!
It sounds like at some point that site will start running into scalability
problems. At which point youll wish you had thought about subnets and
proper routing to begin with.
-Dan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu