Hi,
Yes, I see the problem. Yes, probably using some "default" vrf name
would be better. Looks like Linux uses word "default" to identify the
main table also. At least iproute2 tools. "ip route show vrf default"
works for me. And I see the reference in the man. For example:
This
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 04:23:00PM +0200, Alexander Zubkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have attached a patch to check if there are any vrf-base bfd
> protocols. And if there are none of them, then protocol non-vrf bfd
> protocols takes all sessions. Otherwise it takes only non-vrf
> sessions. I added a
Hi,
I have attached a patch to check if there are any vrf-base bfd
protocols. And if there are none of them, then protocol non-vrf bfd
protocols takes all sessions. Otherwise it takes only non-vrf
sessions. I added a global option into config structure, but not sure
if it is an approved way of
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 4:46 PM Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 03:08:45PM +0200, Alexander Zubkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 2:47 PM Ondrej Zajicek
> > wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > This would work, it is necessary to also set sk->vrf for bfd_open_tx_sk()
> > > foir
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 03:08:45PM +0200, Alexander Zubkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 2:47 PM Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > This would work, it is necessary to also set sk->vrf for bfd_open_tx_sk()
> > foir multihop BFD. It is not necessary to handle it in bfd_reconfigure(),
> >
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 2:47 PM Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:05:49PM +0200, Alexander Zubkov wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I made small fix for myself, that allow bfd to work in one VRF,
> > defined in the configuration:
> >
> > --- a/proto/bfd/packets.c
> > +++
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:05:49PM +0200, Alexander Zubkov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I made small fix for myself, that allow bfd to work in one VRF,
> defined in the configuration:
>
> --- a/proto/bfd/packets.c
> +++ b/proto/bfd/packets.c
> @@ -413,6 +413,7 @@ bfd_open_rx_sk(struct bfd_proto *p, int
Hello,
I made small fix for myself, that allow bfd to work in one VRF,
defined in the configuration:
--- a/proto/bfd/packets.c
+++ b/proto/bfd/packets.c
@@ -413,6 +413,7 @@ bfd_open_rx_sk(struct bfd_proto *p, int multihop, int af)
sk->type = SK_UDP;
sk->subtype = af;
sk->sport =
Hello
Yes, this is currently not implemented properly, i forgot about it.
Would require some substantial work. There are two possibilities:
- Multiple BFD instances, each in VRF, with proper dispatch of BFD
requests to instances based on VRF.
- One BFD instance, with multiple listening sockets,
Hello,
I tried to run BFD in a VRF and looks like it is not working.
The similar config without VRFs works ok. Config without a VRF:
ipv4 table master4;
protocol device {}
protocol bfd {}
protocol bgp b {
local 192.168.1.3 as 65003;
neighbor 192.168.1.2 as 65002;
strict bind yes;
10 matches
Mail list logo