On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 06:56:33PM +0100, tony sarendal wrote: > On 10/04/06, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > * tony sarendal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-10 19:04]: > > > On 10/04/06, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > * tony sarendal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-08 00:51]: > > > > > It looks like bgpd has a problem with validating nexthop on new > > > > interfaces > > > > > when they are created. > > > > > A flap of the interface or restarting bgpd makes nexthop validate. > > > > > I have only tested with vlan interfaces. > > > > > > > > bizarre. I was able to see - let's call it "something odd" when I > > tried > > > > to reproduce that from home earlier this morning. Now I am completly > > > > unable to reproduce - it works just like it should. the RTM_IFANNOUNCE > > > > message that tells us about the new interface is directly followed by > > a > > > > RTM_IFINFO one giving us linkstate and the like and thus everything > > > > gets set allright. > > > > please: > > > > -run bgpd -d while doing this, and show output > > > > -run 'route monitor' as well > > > > > I run "ifconfig vlan26 create" and route monitor outputs: > > > > creating it manually is not needed. > > > > > got message of size 24 on Mon Apr 10 17:03:36 2006 > > > RTM_IFANNOUNCE: iface arrival/departure: len 24, if# 13, name vlan26, > > what: > > > arrival > > > > > > > > > > > > I run " ifconfig vlan26 vlan 26 vlandev pcn1" and route monitor outputs: > > > > > > got message of size 96 on Mon Apr 10 17:04:02 2006 > > > RTM_NEWADDR: address being added to iface: len 96, metric 0, flags: > > > sockaddrs: <NETMASK,IFP,IFA> > > > ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:: 00:0c:29:25:74:9f fe80::20c:29ff:fe25:749f%vlan26 > > > got message of size 124 on Mon Apr 10 17:04:02 2006 > > > RTM_ADD: Add Route: len 124, pid: 0, seq 0, errno 0, > > flags:<UP,HOST,LLINFO> > > > locks: inits: > > > sockaddrs: <DST,GATEWAY> > > > fe80::20c:29ff:fe25:749f%vlan26 00:0c:29:25:74:9f > > > got message of size 188 on Mon Apr 10 17:04:02 2006 > > > RTM_ADD: Add Route: len 188, pid: 0, seq 0, errno 0, > > flags:<UP,DONE,CLONING> > > > locks: inits: > > > sockaddrs: <DST,GATEWAY,NETMASK,IFP,IFA> > > > fe80::%vlan26 link#13 (255) > > > Qff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff.ff00:0c:29:25: > > > 74:9f fe80::20c:29ff:fe25:749f%vlan26 > > > > wow. if you use the create, assign vlan/vlandev sequence ther eis no > > RTM_IFINFO! that's why we don't have no flags and stuff. > > > > > I now flap the interface: > > > > > > cr203-STO# ifconfig vlan26 down; ifconfig vlan26 up > > > > > > bgpd -d reports: > > > > > > nexthop 10.1.1.38 now valid: directly connected > > > > yep, bacuse that causes an RTM_IFINFO and thuwe we learn link state and > > flags and stuff > > > > bizarre. I'll try to look closer when I find some time > > (I do have a small diff that solves it, fetching teh info from sysctl, > > but I really want to find out what goes wrong here. fetching via sysctl > > should NOT be needed.) > > > > Cool. No need to rush it for me, I am in a testing environment and have time > to wait for a fix, and solid fixes are nice. >
Could you try a different interface (something else than pcn(4)). Could be a driver specific issue (e.g. em(4) creates the RTM_IFINFO) -- :wq Claudio
