Graeme Lee wrote:
Graeme Lee wrote:
tico wrote:
Graeme Lee wrote:
tico wrote:
Graeme Lee wrote:
<<snip>>
Network layout is somewhat complicated. 1 x ebgp and 1 x ibgp
session receive ipv4 world tables. Gif tunnel to a hurricane
router in Hong Kong. I'm receiving ipv6 world bgp tables from
this peer. Connectivity to the peer is fine. Just can't get
past it.
I can see that my prefix is announced via looking glasses. I'm
receiving about 1.6k prefixes from hurricane.
I'm speaking BGP over v6 with HE.net as well (albeit in Fremont,
not HK), and I can see you just fine, and apparently you can see
me (AS30708) as well, since I can ping you from both my Hurricane
/64 as well as from an IP within my own /32.
$ ping6 -c1 -S 2607:f618:1::1 2001:470:17:7f::2
PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2607:f618:1::1 --> 2001:470:17:7f::2
16 bytes from 2001:470:17:7f::2, icmp_seq=0 hlim=59 time=442.275 ms
--- 2001:470:17:7f::2 ping6 statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 442.275/442.275/442.275/0.000 ms
$ ping6 -c1 2001:470:17:7f::2 PING6(56=40+8+8
bytes) 2001:470:1:53::2 --> 2001:470:17:7f::2
16 bytes from 2001:470:17:7f::2, icmp_seq=0 hlim=59 time=441.775 ms
--- 2001:470:17:7f::2 ping6 statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 441.775/441.775/441.775/0.000 ms
$ bgpctl sho ip bgp 2400:6800::/32 flags: * = Valid, >
= Selected, I = via IBGP, A = Announced
origin: i = IGP, e = EGP, ? = Incomplete
flags destination gateway lpref med aspath origin
*> 2400:6800::/32 2001:470:1:53::1 100 0 6939 10105 i
$ uname -mr
4.4 i386
What does your "bgpctl sho nex" give you?
-tico
Ok forget bgp configs for a minute. I've been quickly scanning over
the code, and notable is that the log displays:
Feb 9 13:00:15 gw-nextgen bgpd[17223]: send_rtmsg: action 1, prefix
2001:7fb:fe07::/48: Network is unreachable
but shouldn't it be a send_rt6msg call in kroute.c?
On a hunch, I tried a 64bit and a 32 bit machine with 1 prefix each.
The 32bit machine adds routes to the kernel without complaint. The
64bit machine complained with send_rtmsg....