Ciao Paolo,

> Il giorno 25 mag 2020, alle ore 16:03, Paolo Lucente <[email protected]> ha 
> scritto:
> 
> Ciao Simone,
> 
> If i got it correct you are after static mapping of communities to input
> traffic - given an input interface / vlan or an ingress router or a
> source MAC address.

Yes, just to be clear imagine this scenario:

route 192.0.2.0/24, originated by AS1000, coming in from two upstreams (AS100, 
AS200) announced as follows:

192.0.2.0/24 100 500 1000 (100:100)
192.0.2.0/24 200 1000 (200:100)

Obviously the path via AS200 will be the best one, so pmacctd always attaches 
community 200:100 to inbound traffic…even if enters via AS100 (it can 
discriminate the peer src AS thanks to the relevant map)

> It seems doable, like you said, adding a machinery
> like it exists for the source peer ASN.

If I understand correctly, in nfacctd/sfacctd the association is done looking 
at the BGP next-hop attribute; maybe it’s possible to sort it out just by 
“extending” the existing map to let the user “suggest” that traffic matching a 
relevant filter has a specific bgp next-hop as well as a peer src AS…but I’m 
just thinking out loud here.

> I'd have one question for you:
> 
> How would the 'output' look like: one single community or a list of
> communities (ths may make less sense but still i'd like to double-check
> with you)?

Regarding the format, the actual output will be OK (single string, communities 
separated by _), as I push everything via AMQP and parsing gets done upper in 
the stack; it’s not a bad thing, when considering that not all databases are 
going to accept arrays of objects and that trasformation is easily supported by 
a lot of tooling (be it logstash, telegraph, fluentd…)

> I guess you may be interested in either standard or large
> communities but not extended, true? And, if true, would you have any
> preferences among the two? Perhaps the standard ones since you mention
> 'src_std_comm’?

At the moment the support for the standard ones will suffice, for me

> It's not a biggie and i guess i can converge on this relatively soon;
> can you confrm your priority / urgency? 

Oh it’s not urgent at all, but it would be a very nice-to-have feature which 
helps getting a lot of interesting insights.
Just one thing: as you may remember I’ve got a nice testing environment that 
you’re welcome to use if it helps.

Thank you!
Simone.


_______________________________________________
pmacct-discussion mailing list
http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists

Reply via email to