Hoi,
A while ago, I toyed with unnumbered interfaces and enabling Babel and
OSPF. There's a few ways to do this in VPP, which I detailed in a blog post:
https://ipng.ch/s/articles/2024/04/06/vpp-with-loopback-only-ospfv3-part-1/
At the bottom of this post, I compare the two solutions I explored --
While on the one hand, setting the /unnumbered/ interface would be
best reflected in Linux, it is not without problems. If the operator
subsequently tries to remove one of the addresses on |e0| or |e1|,
that will yield a desync between Linux and VPP (Linux will have
removed the address, but VPP will still be /unnumbered/). On the
other hand, tricking Linux (and the operator) to believe there isn’t
an IPv4 (and IPv6) address configured on the interface, is also not
great.
Of the two approaches, I think I prefer /Solution 2/ (configuring
the Linux CP plugin to not sync /unnumbered/ addresses), because it
minimizes the chance of operator error.
I've been running this feature for about 18mo now in AS8298, and would
like to upstream the change:
https://gerrit.fd.io/r/c/vpp/+/44890
It is non-intrusive, the default is to propagate unnumbered addresses to
Linux. When setting the feature to `off`, the propagation is inhibited.
Please take a look and let me know your thoughts.
groet,
Pim
--
Pim van Pelt<[email protected]>
PBVP1-RIPEhttps://ipng.ch/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#26798): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/26798
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/117747530/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/leave/14379924/21656/631435203/xyzzy
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
