Hi,
While waiting for the fate of the previous patches, I was thinking
about that thing about using keywords as symbols. So here is another
longread. :)
Now it is not possible to mix a keyword and a keyword as a symbol
together. Here is what I mean. With current master bird if I use
config:
Dear Benoit,
this looks like that you maybe want to bump the bgp_local_pref by some value
for the transit route, or properly use bgp_med. You haven't disclosed much so I
can't help you more specifically than this.
Anyway, as this is obviously a pretty big deployment, you may make a good use
For redundancy I am thinking to have a router reflector per pop . Each route
reflector would peer with each others. The issue is that since each POP has a
transit, i have duplicate route and sometimes a loop is created. How can it be
prevented?? I tried to put them in the same cluster but it
Hello!
Please find attached 'show bgp summary' patch for bird 2.13.
Code has been simplified and placed in more correct place.
Route stats are shown for each channel.
Example output:
bird> show bgp summary
PeerAS Last state changeState/Last
error
I highly doubt that, but their NOC is not exactly helpful on the matter.
They say that peer is configured for my ASN, but as I said router is out of my
control.
Nothing else, just Bad peer AS. I hope screenshot was not cut, but in case
tshark dump below:
BIRD initiation:
Border Gateway Protocol
> You basically shouldn't do it. BIRD does something like last-resort pointer
> comparison and we should probably even add a warning if somebody misconfigures
> in this way.
Why not use the protocol's default preference as a last-resort tie-breaker?
It's probably less code than the warning you
You basically shouldn't do it. BIRD does something like last-resort pointer
comparison and we should probably even add a warning if somebody misconfigures
in this way.
Maria
On 14 June 2023 15:54:13 CEST, "Marek Küthe" wrote:
>Thanks for the answer.
>
>What happens when the preference is the
Thanks for the answer.
What happens when the preference is the same for two different protocol
types - which protocol is preferred? For example, if you have the
preference of BGP and Babel routes both set to 100, which route will be
chosen? BGP and Babel routes can't really be compared since BGP
Hello,
I did not find any other patch (for Netlink) in that thread, but i could
try to hack it myself.
Here is the patch as an attachment.
Luizdiff --git a/sysdep/linux/netlink.c b/sysdep/linux/netlink.c
index 7f0d4736..e3298a0f 100644
--- a/sysdep/linux/netlink.c
+++ b/sysdep/linux/netlink.c
> On 14 Jun 2023, at 13:41, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 11:14:55AM +0100, Alexander Chernikov wrote:
>> Hi Ondrej,
>>
>> Could you please consider merging IPv4 over IPv6 support for FreeBSD Netlink
>> as well?
>> It seems like the patch slipped through the cracks :-(
>
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 11:14:55AM +0100, Alexander Chernikov wrote:
> Hi Ondrej,
>
> Could you please consider merging IPv4 over IPv6 support for FreeBSD Netlink
> as well?
> It seems like the patch slipped through the cracks :-(
Hi
I did not find any other patch (for Netlink) in that
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 12:20:37PM +0200, Łukasz Jarosz wrote:
> I think worth mentioning is that I have 4B AS whilst my peer has 2B AS.
> All I get is this error:
>
> I checked pcap dumps and they seem reasonable. BIRD open is followed by peer
> OPEN with piggybacked NOTIFICATION message.
>
>
On 14.06.23 12:20, Marek Küthe wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 11:52:38 +0200
> Bernd Naumann wrote:
>
>> On 14.06.23 11:29, Marek Küthe wrote:
>>> Is it possible to view the preference using "birdc"?
>>
>> `birdc show route` shows the protocol preference at the end of the line
>> in brackets. Or
Hello,
I have an issue with connectivity towards provider's router (out of my control).
I setup BGP session as usual:
protocol bgp [redacted] {
local [redacted] as [redacted];
neighbor [redacted] as [redacted];
ipv4 {
table bgp;
next hop self;
import filter bgp_in;
export filter bgp_out;
};
}
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 11:52:38 +0200
Bernd Naumann wrote:
> On 14.06.23 11:29, Marek Küthe wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I noticed that when you "mix" routing protocols, it can be useful to
> > change the "preference", but unfortunately there is little
> > documentation in bird about this and no way
Hi Ondrej,
Could you please consider merging IPv4 over IPv6 support for FreeBSD Netlink as
well?
It seems like the patch slipped through the cracks :-(
Sorry for not replying to the thread, it got purged by my email client.
The original message:
Hello!
While testing bird 2.13 with a bunch of non-default tables, including separate
tables for flow specifications, I've found the output of 'show route' without
additional parameters a bit annoying:
# birdc show route
BIRD 2.13 ready.
Table FLOW4:
flow4 { dst 109.68.40.15/32; proto 17; dport
On 14.06.23 11:29, Marek Küthe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that when you "mix" routing protocols, it can be useful to
> change the "preference", but unfortunately there is little
> documentation in bird about this and no way to view it.
>
> Is it possible to view the preference using "birdc"?
Hello,
I noticed that when you "mix" routing protocols, it can be useful to
change the "preference", but unfortunately there is little
documentation in bird about this and no way to view it.
Is it possible to view the preference using "birdc"?
Is it possible to include the default values (in
19 matches
Mail list logo
