April 2021 - frog - lists.frrouting.org

Yocto Recipe for FRR
by Amol Lad 10 Aug '21

10 Aug '21

Hi, Please advise if there is any Yocto recipe for FRRouting? If not, how to go about creating one for FRR? Yocto Recipe for FRR will hugely simplify integrating FRR in Yocto based embedded linux distributions. So please advise if there are any plans to develop this recipe? Thanks Amol ________________________________ The information in this email communication (inclusive of attachments) is confidential to 4RF Limited and the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), please note that any use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this information or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and that the author accepts no liability for the consequences of any action taken on the basis of the information provided. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and then delete all instances of this email from your system. 4RF Limited will not accept responsibility for any consequences associated with the use of this email (including, but not limited to, damages sustained as a result of any viruses and/or any action or lack of action taken in reliance on it).

4 10

frr-7.0-10.el8.x86_64 bgpd - updates
by Steve Clark 30 Apr '21

30 Apr '21

I found a version of quagga-1.2.4-2.el8.x86_64.rpm from redhat that worked fine when I replace frr with it. Hello, I am trying to get frr-7.0-10.el8.x86_64 bgp to connect to quagga-0.99.22.4-1.el6.x86_64 and it isn't working. I have no problem with the same bgpd.conf files when just using quagga. in a tcpdump on the frr side i see this error ... length 21: BGP Notification Message (3), length: 21, Finite State Machine Error (5) subcode Unknown (0) this what i see on the frr side Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 10.9.0.4 4 65004 0 0 0 0 0 never Active this is what i see on the quagga side Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 10.9.0.1 4 65001 39 41 0 0 0 00:45:53 Idle any thoughts ? -- Stephen Clark Email Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential and/or protected health information (PHI) and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended (HIPAA). This transmission is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, printing or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited and may subject you to criminal or civil penalties. If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete this email and any attachments from any computer. Vaso Corporation and its subsidiary companies are not responsible for data leaks that result from email messages received that contain privileged and confidential and/or protected health information (PHI).

1 0

frr-7.0-10.el8.x86_64 bgpd
by Steve Clark 30 Apr '21

30 Apr '21

Hello, I am trying to get frr-7.0-10.el8.x86_64 bgp to connect to quagga-0.99.22.4-1.el6.x86_64 and it isn't working. I have no problem with the same bgpd.conf files when just using quagga. in a tcpdump on the frr side i see this error ... length 21: BGP Notification Message (3), length: 21, Finite State Machine Error (5) subcode Unknown (0) this what i see on the frr side Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 10.9.0.4 4 65004 0 0 0 0 0 never Active this is what i see on the quagga side Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 10.9.0.1 4 65001 39 41 0 0 0 00:45:53 Idle any thoughts ? -- Stephen Clark Email Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential and/or protected health information (PHI) and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended (HIPAA). This transmission is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, printing or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited and may subject you to criminal or civil penalties. If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete this email and any attachments from any computer. Vaso Corporation and its subsidiary companies are not responsible for data leaks that result from email messages received that contain privileged and confidential and/or protected health information (PHI).

1 0

frr docker latest /etc/frr is a file
by 0xbabaf00l 28 Apr '21

28 Apr '21

Hi list, I pulled the frr docker image frrouting/frr:latest today, but I was unable to start it with a volume for /etc/frr. /etc/frr is a file (daemons file) and not a directory: # docker run -it frrouting/frr:latest ls -l /etc/frr WARNING: IPv4 forwarding is disabled. Networking will not work. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2619 Apr 28 05:42 /etc/frr # docker image ls REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED SIZE frrouting/frr latest 853e0587cf40 5 hours ago 145MB Is this intended or a bug? Thanks. Cheers, Sascha

1 0

Netconf YANG FRR Doc
by Benjamin Vandendriessche 15 Apr '21

15 Apr '21

Hi, Is there any documentation available in order to run netconf with FRR ? Thanks, Benjamin

1 0

DockerHub FRR images cleanup warning
by Quentin Young 14 Apr '21

14 Apr '21

Hi operators, For those of you who use our Docker images (https://hub.docker.com/r/frrouting/frr) you've probably noticed we have a bunch of messy tags on that repo. I'm planning on cleaning this up in a little while to delete unnecessary / unintentional tags. Tags corresponding to releases are named vX.Y.Z. So for example, the image with 7.5.1 is "frrouting/frr:v7.5.1". These won't be going anywhere. Neither will the "latest" tag - this tag is an automatic build off of our Git tree. (This also means you shouldn't be relying on it and should always be specifying a release tag, by the way). I'm going to delete the rest of the tags as they don't correspond to anything in particular. Specifically, I plan on deleting the following tags: frr-7.5.1 multiarch frr-7.3 base_7.3 I'm planning on deleting these tomorrow at 5pm EST. I see that frr-7.3 and frr-7.5.1 have been pulled recently. If you're pulling these tags please use tags v7.3.1 and v7.5.1 instead. Quentin

1 1

YANG error
by Erwan David 13 Apr '21

13 Apr '21

Hello, On FRR 7.5.1, trying to define a multihop bfd peer, I get the following error : minimum-ttl 240 % Failed to edit configuration. YANG error(s): Schema node not found. YANG path: /frr-bfdd:bfdd/bfd/sessions/single-hop[dest-addr='80.74.78.202'][interface=''][vrf='default']/minimum-ttl Does this mean the minimum-ttl command is not defined at all or just not defined in vtysh ? (in that case the system not being on production yet, I can stop frr and edit frr.conf) Thanks.

1 0

Filtering kernel routes import
by Tim Weippert 11 Apr '21

11 Apr '21

Hi, i'm trying to filter a kernel default route from beeing imported into frr/zebra. I tried with a prefix-list/route-map bound to ip procotol kernel# but it seems it get only used on export routes to the kernel, not import routes from the kernel. Is there a easy way to filter kernel route imports into frr/zebra? regards, tim -- Tim Weippert http://weiti.org - weiti(a)weiti.org GPG Fingerprint - E704 7303 6FF0 8393 ADB1 398E 67F2 94AE 5995 7DD8

2 4

BFD in a VRF not listening for port 3784/4784
by Andrew Denton 08 Apr '21

08 Apr '21

Hi, I'm running frr 7.5.1 and trying to configure BFD for an interface in a VRF. BFD counters don't show any "Control packet input" packets, and I think this is because FRR needs to listen on port 3784 inside the VRF, it's non-VRF socket won't receive any packets from the VRF. I manually tested this idea with "netcat -ul 3784", and I was only able to receive BFD packets if I create the netcat listening socket within the VRF (e.g. "ip vrf exec myvrf netcat -ul 3784"). BFDD does create a socket in the VRF, but it's for a high port not for 3784/4784. I'm running on RHEL8 / kernel 4.18.0-240.15.1.el8_3.x86_64 and using FRR from rpm.frrouting.org/repo/el8. Is there some config I'm missing, or should I file this as a bug? For example, bfd peer 192.0.2.12 vrf myvrf interface enp4s0f1 Results in # ss -abnp | fgrep bfd udp UNCONN 0 0 0.0.0.0%myvrf:49155 0.0.0.0:* users:(("bfdd",pid=160681,fd=26)) udp UNCONN 0 0 0.0.0.0:3784 0.0.0.0:* users:(("bfdd",pid=160681,fd=14)) udp UNCONN 0 0 0.0.0.0:3785 0.0.0.0:* users:(("bfdd",pid=160681,fd=18)) udp UNCONN 0 0 [::]:4784 [::]:* users:(("bfdd",pid=160681,fd=17)) udp UNCONN 0 0 [::]:3784 [::]:* users:(("bfdd",pid=160681,fd=16)) udp UNCONN 0 0 [::]:3785 [::]:* users:(("bfdd",pid=160681,fd=19)) # vtysh -c "show bfd peers counter" peer 192.0.2.12 multihop local-address 192.0.2.13 vrf internet Control packet input: 0 packets Control packet output: 5140 packets Echo packet input: 0 packets Echo packet output: 0 packets Session up events: 0 Session down events: 0 Zebra notifications: 2 Compare with BGP, which does work for me in a VRF because it listens on port 179 inside the VRF. # ss -abnp 'sport = :179' Netid State Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address:Port Peer Address:Port tcp LISTEN 0 128 0.0.0.0%myvrf:179 0.0.0.0:* users:(("bgpd",pid=160658,fd=26)) tcp LISTEN 0 128 [::]%myvrf:179 [::]:* users:(("bgpd",pid=160658,fd=27)) Thank you, Andrew

2 2

Re: [FROG] FRRouting and MPLS (Yakov Sh.)
by Tomás Morales 05 Apr '21

05 Apr '21

Hi all I am trying Yakov blog below to test L3VPN using FRR7.5 and the last PE is not capable to de-encapsulate the labelled traffic and send it to the CE. This is the diagram in my lab: https://github.com/thomarite/linux-mpls-testing/blob/master/lab4-l3vpn/diag… For example CE1 (vrf_cust1 - 192.168.11.102/24) tries to ping CE3 (vrf_cust1 - 192.168.23.102/24) P1 is receiving the traffic with double labels as expected from PE1: 19:28:46.075164 MPLS (label 17, exp 0, ttl 63) (label 80, exp 0, [S], ttl 63) IP 192.168.11.102 > 192.168.23.102: ICMP echo request, id 2296, seq 10, length 64 19:28:47.099199 MPLS (label 17, exp 0, ttl 63) (label 80, exp 0, [S], ttl 63) IP 192.168.11.102 > 192.168.23.102: ICMP echo request, id 2296, seq 11, length 64 PE2 is receiving the traffic on ens8 with just one label after P1 doing PHP: 19:28:46.074437 MPLS (label 80, exp 0, [S], ttl 63) IP 192.168.11.102 > 192.168.23.102: ICMP echo request, id 2296, seq 10, length 64 19:28:47.098555 MPLS (label 80, exp 0, [S], ttl 63) IP 192.168.11.102 > 192.168.23.102: ICMP echo request, id 2296, seq 11, length 64 But then PE2 is not sending anything to CE3. I can't see anything in either end. I have checked iptables in my host just in case but I think PE2 is not sending anything. >From PE2, all routing seems correct: PE2# show mpls table Inbound Label Type Nexthop Outbound Label ----------------------------------------------------- 16 LDP 192.168.77.102 16 17 LDP 192.168.77.102 implicit-null 18 LDP 192.168.77.102 implicit-null 80 BGP vrf_cust1 - 81 BGP vrf_cust2 - PE2# PE2# show bgp summary IPv4 Unicast Summary: BGP router identifier 172.20.5.2, local AS number 65010 vrf-id 0 BGP table version 0 RIB entries 0, using 0 bytes of memory Peers 1, using 21 KiB of memory Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd PfxSnt 172.20.5.1 4 65010 101 108 0 0 0 01:35:41 0 0 Total number of neighbors 1 IPv4 VPN Summary: BGP router identifier 172.20.5.2, local AS number 65010 vrf-id 0 BGP table version 0 RIB entries 7, using 1344 bytes of memory Peers 1, using 21 KiB of memory Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd PfxSnt 172.20.5.1 4 65010 101 108 0 0 0 01:35:41 2 2 Total number of neighbors 1 PE2# PE2# show ip route vrf vrf_cust1 Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, D - SHARP, F - PBR, f - OpenFabric, > - selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup VRF vrf_cust1: B> 192.168.11.0/24 [200/0] via 172.20.5.1 (vrf default) (recursive), label 80, weight 1, 01:35:40 * via 192.168.77.102, ens8 (vrf default), label 16/80, weight 1, 01:35:40 C>* 192.168.23.0/24 is directly connected, ens6, 01:38:19 PE2# PE2# PE2# show isis neighbor Area ISIS: System Id Interface L State Holdtime SNPA P1 ens8 2 Up 28 2020.2020.2020 PE2# vagrant@PE2:~$ ip route default via 192.168.121.1 dev ens5 proto dhcp src 192.168.121.31 metric 1024 172.20.5.1 encap mpls 16 via 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto isis metric 20 172.20.5.5 via 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto isis metric 20 192.168.66.0/24 via 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto isis metric 20 192.168.77.0/24 dev ens8 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.77.101 192.168.121.0/24 dev ens5 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.121.31 192.168.121.1 dev ens5 proto dhcp scope link src 192.168.121.31 metric 1024 vagrant@PE2:~$ vagrant@PE2:~$ ip -4 a 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever inet 172.20.5.2/32 scope global lo valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 2: ens5: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP group default qlen 1000 inet 192.168.121.31/24 brd 192.168.121.255 scope global dynamic ens5 valid_lft 2524sec preferred_lft 2524sec 3: ens6: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master vrf_cust1 state UP group default qlen 1000 inet 192.168.23.101/24 brd 192.168.23.255 scope global ens6 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 4: ens7: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master vrf_cust2 state UP group default qlen 1000 inet 192.168.24.101/24 brd 192.168.24.255 scope global ens7 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 5: ens8: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP group default qlen 1000 inet 192.168.77.101/24 brd 192.168.77.255 scope global ens8 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever vagrant@PE2:~$ vagrant@PE2:~$ ip -M route 16 as to 16 via inet 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto ldp 17 via inet 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto ldp 18 via inet 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto ldp vagrant@PE2:~$ vagrant@PE2:~$ ip route show table 10 blackhole default 192.168.11.0/24 encap mpls 16/80 via 192.168.77.102 dev ens8 proto bgp metric 20 broadcast 192.168.23.0 dev ens6 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.23.101 192.168.23.0/24 dev ens6 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.23.101 local 192.168.23.101 dev ens6 proto kernel scope host src 192.168.23.101 broadcast 192.168.23.255 dev ens6 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.23.101 vagrant@PE2:~$ vagrant@PE2:~$ ip vrf Name Table ----------------------- vrf_cust1 10 vrf_cust2 20 vagrant@PE2:~$ This is PE2 FRR config: PE2# show running-config Building configuration... Current configuration: ! frr version 7.5 frr defaults traditional hostname PE2 service integrated-vtysh-config ! interface ens8 ip router isis ISIS isis circuit-type level-2-only isis network point-to-point ! interface lo ip router isis ISIS isis passive ! router bgp 65010 neighbor 172.20.5.1 remote-as 65010 neighbor 172.20.5.1 update-source 172.20.5.2 ! address-family ipv4 vpn neighbor 172.20.5.1 activate exit-address-family ! router bgp 65010 vrf vrf_cust1 ! address-family ipv4 unicast redistribute connected label vpn export auto rd vpn export 65010:10 rt vpn both 1:1 export vpn import vpn exit-address-family ! router bgp 65010 vrf vrf_cust2 ! address-family ipv4 unicast redistribute connected label vpn export auto rd vpn export 65010:20 rt vpn both 2:2 export vpn import vpn exit-address-family ! mpls ldp router-id 172.20.5.2 ! address-family ipv4 discovery transport-address 172.20.5.2 ! interface ens8 ! exit-address-family ! ! router isis ISIS net 49.0001.1720.2000.5002.00 ! line vty ! end PE2# This is PE2 sysctl mpls config: root@PE2:/home/vagrant# sysctl -a | grep mpls net.mpls.conf.ens5.input = 0 net.mpls.conf.ens6.input = 0 net.mpls.conf.ens7.input = 0 net.mpls.conf.ens8.input = 1 net.mpls.conf.lo.input = 0 net.mpls.conf.vrf_cust1.input = 0 net.mpls.conf.vrf_cust2.input = 0 net.mpls.default_ttl = 255 net.mpls.ip_ttl_propagate = 1 net.mpls.platform_labels = 100000 root@PE2:/home/vagrant# This is PE1: PE1# PE1# show bgp summary IPv4 Unicast Summary: BGP router identifier 172.20.5.1, local AS number 65010 vrf-id 0 BGP table version 0 RIB entries 0, using 0 bytes of memory Peers 1, using 21 KiB of memory Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd PfxSnt 172.20.5.2 4 65010 111 105 0 0 0 01:39:14 0 0 Total number of neighbors 1 IPv4 VPN Summary: BGP router identifier 172.20.5.1, local AS number 65010 vrf-id 0 BGP table version 0 RIB entries 11, using 2112 bytes of memory Peers 1, using 21 KiB of memory Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd PfxSnt 172.20.5.2 4 65010 111 105 0 0 0 01:39:14 2 2 Total number of neighbors 1 PE1# PE1# PE1# show mpls table Inbound Label Type Nexthop Outbound Label ----------------------------------------------------- 16 LDP 192.168.66.102 implicit-null 17 LDP 192.168.66.102 implicit-null 18 LDP 192.168.66.102 17 80 BGP vrf_cust1 - 81 BGP vrf_cust2 - PE1# PE1# show ip route vrf all default vrf_cust1 vrf_cust2 PE1# show ip route vrf vrf_cust1 Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, D - SHARP, F - PBR, f - OpenFabric, > - selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup VRF vrf_cust1: C>* 192.168.11.0/24 is directly connected, ens6, 01:44:51 B> 192.168.23.0/24 [200/0] via 172.20.5.2 (vrf default) (recursive), label 80, weight 1, 01:39:18 * via 192.168.66.102, ens8 (vrf default), label 17/80, weight 1, 01:39:18 PE1# PE1# show isis neighbor Area ISIS: System Id Interface L State Holdtime SNPA P1 ens8 2 Up 30 2020.2020.2020 PE1# PE1# If I try to ping CE3 to CE1, I see exactly the same behaviour in PE1. Any idea what I am missing? Thanks tomas On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 12:00 PM <frog-request(a)lists.frrouting.org> wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:27:44 +0000 > From: "Yakov Sh." <yman(a)protonmail.ch> > To: Olivier CALVANO <o.calvano(a)gmail.com> > Cc: "frog(a)lists.frrouting.org" <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> > Subject: Re: [FROG] FRRouting and MPLS > Message-ID: > <TaX1p13MyS4pDJfNgZ_qra4Lqq-QppV4Gc_JkTUmi9s41lOR7krEd9PBvr1kfX52s03BEhaxOxsaeb_KiIeKoe0QVUUnx-zRhDI72rDSwrM=@ protonmail.ch> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi! > I had not much experience with FRR in production, but I gave it a try some time ago in a lab and was able to build L3VPN service on VMs with kernel VRF support. You can see details in my blog post - http://dvjourney.yman.site/2018/10/26/l3vpn-on-linux/ > For L2VPN, as stated in docs, only OpenBSD supports VPWS/VPLS at the moment. http://docs.frrouting.org/en/latest/overview.html#feature-matrix > > Yakov Sh. > telegram: @darkyman > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Monday, November 23, 2020 12:15 PM, Olivier CALVANO < o.calvano(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I have just installed FRR for the first time on a Linux CentOS 8 distribution. I am therefore just starting out. > > > > I am gradually reading the forums but there is a lot of information. FRR manages without worries the BGP and the ISIS which I use regularly on my cisco routers. > > > > I am now trying to find out if FRR can integrate more deeply into my network, particularly at the MPLS level. as I understood it is in the Kernel that this is done and not in FRR, but is there a way to integrate VRF IP VPN? and the creation of a VLAN type subinterface directly in FRR? > > > > Then last question: Is there an implementation of the Cisco EoMPLS equivalent in FRR? (xconnect encapsultation mpls) > > > > thank you > > Olivier >

1 1