Hi All, A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical router. A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which uses RT, RD in BGP updates C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping. Are A, B, C all supported by FRR? Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in FRR? Thanks, Jay On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" <dev-bounces@lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote: Mark - Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk. thanks! donald On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs@voltanet.io> wrote: > Hi, > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd like to > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible next-steps. > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the > topic? The broad goals are sort of: > > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or -planes that > are in use, > * to improve support for remote dataplanes, > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated pthread, > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events > > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib updates, > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some questions. > > Thanks, > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.frrouting.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis... > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.frrouting.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
Hello Jay, just for my understanding: in (b), do you want to say "VPN is both ..." ? I don't see why a 'VRF' requires any BGP/RT/RD. At least not in the way I'm used to use the term VRF. VPNs use VRFs though. Would have connected the term 'VRF' with (c), quite literally as "virtual routing and forwarding". Words ... :-) Regards, Marc On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 20:59:09 +0000, Jia Chen wrote:
Hi All,
A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical router.
A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which uses RT, RD in BGP updates C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD
Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping.
Are A, B, C all supported by FRR?
Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in FRR?
Thanks, Jay
On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" <dev-bounces@lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
Mark -
Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk.
thanks!
donald
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs@voltanet.io> wrote: > Hi, > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd like to > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible next-steps. > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the > topic? The broad goals are sort of: > > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or -planes that > are in use, > * to improve support for remote dataplanes, > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated pthread, > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events > > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib updates, > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some questions. > > Thanks, > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.frrouting.org >
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
>
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.frrouting.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.frrouting.org https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
Hi Marc, Yes, (b) is referring L3VPN, or EVPN or VPN cases. (c) Refer to RIB separation case From your email, can I imply that FRR VRF cover both (b) and (c) cases ? Thanks, Jay On 6/28/18, 2:41 PM, "Marc Binderberger" <marc@sniff.de> wrote: Hello Jay, just for my understanding: in (b), do you want to say "VPN is both ..." ? I don't see why a 'VRF' requires any BGP/RT/RD. At least not in the way I'm used to use the term VRF. VPNs use VRFs though. Would have connected the term 'VRF' with (c), quite literally as "virtual routing and forwarding". Words ... :-) Regards, Marc On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 20:59:09 +0000, Jia Chen wrote: > Hi All, > > A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical > router. > > A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding > B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which > uses RT, RD in BGP updates > C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD > > Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping. > > Are A, B, C all supported by FRR? > > Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router > into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, > routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in > FRR? > > Thanks, > Jay > > > > On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" > <dev-bounces@lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> > wrote: > > Mark - > > Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk. > > thanks! > > donald > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs@voltanet.io> wrote: > > Hi, > > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd > like to > > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible > next-steps. > > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the > > topic? The broad goals are sort of: > > > > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or > -planes that > > are in use, > > * to improve support for remote dataplanes, > > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated > pthread, > > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events > > > > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib > updates, > > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some > questions. > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > dev@lists.frrouting.org > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis... > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.frrouting.org > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis... > > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.frrouting.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
A) OSPF v2 supports both MI and VRF's. Use one or the other, but not at the same time. No-one has done the work to make IS-IS vrf aware at this point in time(patches welcome! HA!) For B, I am not really quite sure what you are asking. I guess that you are asking does FRR support l3vpn's and EVPN in a VRF context and yes it does. For C, I do not understand your question. As for logical router, just create linux namespaces and run separate instances of FRR. donald On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Jia Chen <jchen1@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote:
Hi All,
A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical router.
A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which uses RT, RD in BGP updates C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD
Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping.
Are A, B, C all supported by FRR?
Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in FRR?
Thanks, Jay
On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" <dev-bounces@lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
Mark -
Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk.
thanks!
donald
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs@voltanet.io> wrote: > Hi, > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd like to > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible next-steps. > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the > topic? The broad goals are sort of: > > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or -planes that > are in use, > * to improve support for remote dataplanes, > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated pthread, > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events > > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib updates, > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some questions. > > Thanks, > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.frrouting.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis... >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.frrouting.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
Hi Donald, Thank you! Please refer to response inline. (<<<JAY). Thanks, Jay On 6/28/18, 5:09 PM, "Donald Sharp" <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote: A) OSPF v2 supports both MI and VRF's. Use one or the other, but not at the same time. No-one has done the work to make IS-IS vrf aware at this point in time(patches welcome! HA!) (<<<JAY) Ok I will add IS-IS to the to-do-list which needs work to support MI and VRF’s. For B, I am not really quite sure what you are asking. I guess that you are asking does FRR support l3vpn's and EVPN in a VRF context and yes it does. (<<<JAY) Yes, (b) means VPN VRF For C, I do not understand your question. (<<<JAY) Contrast to (b), non-VPN routing instance; Does FRR VRF support both cases, may be the context tell the difference? https://ipwithease.com/difference-between-vrf-and-virtual-router-in-juniper/ As for logical router, just create linux namespaces and run separate instances of FRR. (<<<JAY) OK. donald On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Jia Chen <jchen1@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical router. > > A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding > B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which uses RT, RD in BGP updates > C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD > > Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping. > > Are A, B, C all supported by FRR? > > Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in FRR? > > Thanks, > Jay > > > > On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" <dev-bounces@lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote: > > Mark - > > Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk. > > thanks! > > donald > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs@voltanet.io> wrote: > > Hi, > > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd like to > > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible next-steps. > > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the > > topic? The broad goals are sort of: > > > > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or -planes that > > are in use, > > * to improve support for remote dataplanes, > > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated pthread, > > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events > > > > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib updates, > > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some questions. > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > dev@lists.frrouting.org > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis... > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.frrouting.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis... > >
Jia - The concept of a logical router( or virtual router) is closely tied(mirrored) to linux namespaces concept. Currently if you want complete process separation I would suggest creating a name space and running separate instances of FRR in it( look at the startup options to point FRR at different locations for config and runtime files to do this ) If you want to run one instance of FRR across multiple namespaces there would need to be work done here, but is possible. donald On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:24 PM, Jia Chen <jchen1@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote:
Hi Donald,
Thank you! Please refer to response inline. (<<<JAY).
Thanks,
Jay
On 6/28/18, 5:09 PM, "Donald Sharp" <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
A) OSPF v2 supports both MI and VRF's. Use one or the other, but not
at the same time. No-one has done the work to make IS-IS vrf aware at
this point in time(patches welcome! HA!)
(<<<JAY) Ok I will add IS-IS to the to-do-list which needs work to support MI and VRF’s.
For B, I am not really quite sure what you are asking. I guess that
you are asking does FRR support l3vpn's and EVPN in a VRF context and
yes it does.
(<<<JAY) Yes, (b) means VPN VRF
For C, I do not understand your question.
(<<<JAY) Contrast to (b), non-VPN routing instance; Does FRR VRF support both cases, may be the context tell the difference?
https://ipwithease.com/difference-between-vrf-and-virtual-router-in-juniper/
As for logical router, just create linux namespaces and run separate
instances of FRR.
(<<<JAY) OK.
donald
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Jia Chen <jchen1@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical router.
>
> A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding
> B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which uses RT, RD in BGP updates
> C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD
>
> Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping.
>
> Are A, B, C all supported by FRR?
>
> Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in FRR?
>
> Thanks,
> Jay
>
>
>
> On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" <dev-bounces@lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>
> Mark -
>
> Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk.
>
> thanks!
>
> donald
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs@voltanet.io> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd like to
> > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible next-steps.
> > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the
> > topic? The broad goals are sort of:
> >
> > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or -planes that
> > are in use,
> > * to improve support for remote dataplanes,
> > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated pthread,
> > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events
> >
> > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib updates,
> > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some questions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dev mailing list
> > dev@lists.frrouting.org
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev@lists.frrouting.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_lis...
>
>
participants (3)
-
Donald Sharp -
Jia Chen -
Marc Binderberger