David,
With Ubuntu 18.04.1 (kernel 4.15.0-29) pings sent out on test-vrf and br0 are
successful.
# uname -rv
4.15.0-29-generic #31-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jul 17 15:39:52 UTC 2018
# ping -c 1 -I test-vrf 172.16.2.2
ping: Warning: source address might be selected on device other than test-vrf.
PING 172.16.2.2 (172.16.2.2) from 172.16.1.1 test-vrf: 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 172.16.2.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.050 ms
--- 172.16.2.2 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.050/0.050/0.050/0.000 ms
# ping -c 1 -I br0 172.16.2.2
PING 172.16.2.2 (172.16.2.2) from 172.16.1.1 br0: 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 172.16.2.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.026 ms
--- 172.16.2.2 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.026/0.026/0.026/0.000 ms
However, with Ubuntu 17.10.1 (kernel 4.13.0-21) pings on only test-vrf are
successful. Pings on br0 are not successful.
So it seems like there maybe a change in versions after 4.13.0-21 that causes
pings on br0 to pass.
Nelson
On 7/25/18, 5:35 PM, "D'Souza, Nelson" <ndso...@ciena.com> wrote:
David,
I tried out the commands on an Ubuntu 17.10.1 VM.
The pings on test-vrf are successful, but the pings on br0 are not
successful.
# uname -rv
4.13.0-21-generic #24-Ubuntu SMP Mon Dec 18 17:29:16 UTC 2017
# lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu 17.10
Release: 17.10
Codename: artful
# ip rule --> Note: its missing the l3mdev rule
0: from all lookup local
32766: from all lookup main
32767: from all lookup default
Ran the configs from a bash script vrf.sh
# ./vrf.sh
+ ip netns add foo
+ ip li add veth1 type veth peer name veth2
+ ip li set veth2 netns foo
+ ip -netns foo li set lo up
+ ip -netns foo li set veth2 up
+ ip -netns foo addr add 172.16.1.2/24 dev veth2
+ ip li add test-vrf type vrf table 123
+ ip li set test-vrf up
+ ip ro add vrf test-vrf unreachable default
+ ip li add br0 type bridge
+ ip li set veth1 master br0
+ ip li set veth1 up
+ ip li set br0 up
+ ip addr add dev br0 172.16.1.1/24
+ ip li set br0 master test-vrf
+ ip -netns foo addr add 172.16.2.2/32 dev lo
+ ip ro add vrf test-vrf 172.16.2.2/32 via 172.16.1.2
# ping -I test-vrf 172.16.2.2 -c 2 <<< successful on test-vrf
ping: Warning: source address might be selected on device other than
test-vrf.
PING 172.16.2.2 (172.16.2.2) from 172.16.1.1 test-vrf: 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 172.16.2.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.035 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.2.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.045 ms
--- 172.16.2.2 ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1022ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.035/0.040/0.045/0.005 ms
#ping -I br0 172.16.2.2 -c 2 <<< fails on br0
PING 172.16.2.2 (172.16.2.2) from 172.16.1.1 br0: 56(84) bytes of data.
--- 172.16.2.2 ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 1022ms
Please let me know if I should try a different version.
Nelson
On 7/24/18, 9:08 AM, "D'Souza, Nelson" <ndso...@ciena.com> wrote:
It's strange that enslaving eth1 -> br0 -> test-vrf does not work, but
enslaving eth1->test-vrf works fine.
Nelson
On 7/24/18, 8:58 AM, "D'Souza, Nelson" <ndso...@ciena.com> wrote:
Thank you David, really appreciate the help. Most likely something
specific to my environment.
ip vrf id, does not report anything on my system. Here's the result
after running the command.
# ip vrf id
#
I'll follow up with a VM.
Nelson
On 7/24/18, 5:55 AM, "David Ahern" <d...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
On 7/23/18 7:43 PM, D'Souza, Nelson wrote:
> I copy and pasted the configs onto my device, but pings on
test-vrf do not work in my setup.
> I'm essentially seeing the same issue as I reported before.
>
> In this case, pings sent out on test-vrf (host ns) are
received and replied to by the loopback interface (foo ns). Although the
replies are seen at the test-vrf level, they are not locally delivered to the
ping application.
>
I just built v4.14.52 kernel and ran those commands - worked
fine. It is
something specific to your environment. Is your shell tied to a
VRF --
(ip vrf id)?
After that, I suggest you create a VM running a newer
distribution of
your choice (Ubuntu 17.10 or newer, debian stretch with 4.14
kernel, or
Fedora 26 or newer) and run the commands there.
