January 2022 - frog - lists.frrouting.org

Re: [FROG] subscribe
by Abdelmuhaimen Seaudi 17 Feb '22

17 Feb '22

Hello I would like to know if I can setup an EoMPLS PseudoWire using FRR. And, if it is not fully supported, is there a workaround using FRR ? I will be using Debian 11 as my Linux Distro, Kernel version 4.15.x Thanks for any information about the topic Abdelmuhaimen Seaudi, CCIE # 25265 Email: aseaudi(a)gmail.com Skype: aseaudi LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/aseaudi Telephone: +2012 84644 733 >

2 2

Re: [FROG] What can cause State/PfxRcd "(Policy)" in frr 7.5.1?
by Brandon Jackson 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

bgp ebgp-requires-policy FRR now REQUIRES that you define a filter for RFC8212. https://docs.frrouting.org/en/latest/bgp.html#clicmd-bgp-ebgp-requires-poli… ---------------------------------- Brandon Jackson bjackson(a)napshome.net On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 9:34 AM Peter Olsson via frog < frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Peter Olsson <list-frog(a)jyborn.se> > To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 15:03:34 +0100 > Subject: What can cause State/PfxRcd "(Policy)" in frr 7.5.1? > Hello! > > I am converting a working quagga configuration into an frr configuration, > since quagga seems abandoned these days. > > I run frr 7.5.1-1.1 in debian 11.2. > > Most peers work fine, but a couple of critical ones get this State which I > haven't seen before: > Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > State/PfxRcd PfxSnt > x.x.x.57 4 yyyy 165 6 0 0 0 00:01:07 > (Policy) 9 > x.x.x.77 4 zzzzz 10 4 0 0 0 00:01:07 > (Policy) 0 > > I'm trying to understand what this means, but haven't found anything so > far. > > The only interesting thing I can see is that the affected peers are using > a private AS number on either itself or the other side. > Could that cause the "(Policy)" State? > > Thanks! > > Peter Olsson > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Peter Olsson via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> > To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 15:03:34 +0100 > Subject: [FROG] What can cause State/PfxRcd "(Policy)" in frr 7.5.1? > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog >

1 0

What can cause State/PfxRcd "(Policy)" in frr 7.5.1?
by Peter Olsson 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

Hello! I am converting a working quagga configuration into an frr configuration, since quagga seems abandoned these days. I run frr 7.5.1-1.1 in debian 11.2. Most peers work fine, but a couple of critical ones get this State which I haven't seen before: Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd PfxSnt x.x.x.57 4 yyyy 165 6 0 0 0 00:01:07 (Policy) 9 x.x.x.77 4 zzzzz 10 4 0 0 0 00:01:07 (Policy) 0 I'm trying to understand what this means, but haven't found anything so far. The only interesting thing I can see is that the affected peers are using a private AS number on either itself or the other side. Could that cause the "(Policy)" State? Thanks! Peter Olsson

1 0

VPLS not working on Ubuntu 18 VM
by abdelmuhaimen.seaudi＠orange.com 19 Jan '22

19 Jan '22

Hello, I followed the tutorial, and configured 2 Ubuntu 18 VMs with frr OSPF + LDP + L2VPN VPLS. Routing table is OK on the VMs, pseudowires created OK and UP. I cannot see bridge br0 or interface mpw0, if I do “ifconfig” on the linux vm. I tried pinging over the VPLS, but the frames coming from the host are not encapsulated in MPLS. Is there a specific Linux setup necessary to enable the dataplane forwarding to work ? Thanks Abdel-Muhaimen Seaudi Orange Innovation Egypt Email: abdelmuhaimen.seaudi(a)orange.com Mobile: +2012 84644 733 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

3 5

EoMPLS with FRR
by abdelmuhaimen.seaudi＠orange.com 14 Jan '22

14 Jan '22

Hello I would like to know if I can setup an EoMPLS PseudoWire using FRR. And, if it is not fully supported, is there a workaround using FRR ? My linux: Linux sonic 5.10.0-8-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.46-4 (2021-08-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux. Thanks for any information about the topic Abdel-Muhaimen Seaudi Orange Innovation Egypt Email: abdelmuhaimen.seaudi(a)orange.com Mobile: +2012 84644 733 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

1 0

About eliminating duplicate BFD peer session
by 吴昌容 08 Jan '22

08 Jan '22

Dear FRR community members, I am a user of FRR and I am now using it to build a small-scale experiment network. I ran into a problem regarding the interaction between BFD and BGP in the recent days. My BGP configuration specifies BFD dependencies for BGP neighbors using "neighbor X.X.X.X bfd". And the FRR will create some BFD peer sessions (marked as dynamic in FRR) immediately when it reads the BGP configuration. Then after FRR reads the BFD configuration, it seems that FRR will deregister the previous "dynamic" peer sessions and register those peer sessions (marked as configured) specified in the BFD configuration. I learn this from the debugging log and such mechanisms work in most cases. But in some situations, it does not work. Specifically, the FRR will have two duplicate BFD peer sessions for the same peer at last. I found that restarting FRR can solve the problem. Yet, I wonder whether there is a more elegant solution. The example configuration of the problematic peer is as follows: router #1, with IP address 10.3.0.1 *router bgp 1 no bgp ebgp-requires-policy neighbor 10.0.0.2 remote-as 2 neighbor 10.0.0.2 bfd neighbor 10.1.0.2 remote-as 3 neighbor 10.1.0.2 bfd neighbor 10.4.0.1 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.4.0.1 bfd neighbor 10.4.0.1 update-source 10.3.0.1 neighbor 10.5.0.1 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.5.0.1 bfd neighbor 10.5.0.1 update-source 10.3.0.1 ! address-family ipv4 unicast network 10.0.0.0/24 <http://10.0.0.0/24> network 10.1.0.0/24 <http://10.1.0.0/24> network 10.3.0.0/24 <http://10.3.0.0/24> network 10.4.0.0/24 <http://10.4.0.0/24> network 10.5.0.0/24 <http://10.5.0.0/24> network 10.12.0.0/24 <http://10.12.0.0/24> network 10.13.0.0/24 <http://10.13.0.0/24> network 10.18.0.0/24 <http://10.18.0.0/24> exit-address-familyexitbfd peer 10.0.0.2 transmit-interval 100 receive-interval 100 exit ! peer 10.1.0.2 transmit-interval 100 receive-interval 100 exit ! peer 10.4.0.1 multihop local-address 10.3.0.1 transmit-interval 100 receive-interval 100 exit ! peer 10.5.0.1 multihop local-address 10.3.0.1 transmit-interval 100 receive-interval 100 exit !exit* router #2, with IP address 10.5.0.1 *router bgp 1 no bgp ebgp-requires-policy neighbor 10.3.0.1 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.3.0.1 bfd neighbor 10.3.0.1 update-source 10.5.0.1exitbfd peer 10.3.0.1 multihop local-address 10.5.0.1 transmit-interval 100 receive-interval 100 exit !exit* The router #1 get two duplicate BFD peer sessions as follows: (the interface s0-eth2 has the IP address 10.3.0.1) *peer 10.5.0.1 local-address 10.3.0.1 vrf default interface s0-eth2 ID: 2040029068 Remote ID: 0 Active mode Status: down Downtime: 11 minute(s), 51 second(s) Diagnostics: ok Remote diagnostics: ok Peer Type: dynamic Local timers: Detect-multiplier: 3 Receive interval: 300ms Transmission interval: 300ms Echo receive interval: 50ms Echo transmission interval: disabled Remote timers: Detect-multiplier: 3 Receive interval: 1000ms Transmission interval: 1000ms Echo receive interval: disabled* * peer 10.5.0.1 multihop local-address 10.3.0.1 vrf default ID: 1516906735 Remote ID: 2466577291 Active mode Minimum TTL: 254 Status: up Uptime: 11 minute(s), 51 second(s) Diagnostics: ok Remote diagnostics: ok Peer Type: configured Local timers: Detect-multiplier: 3 Receive interval: 100ms Transmission interval: 100ms Echo receive interval: 50ms Echo transmission interval: disabled Remote timers: Detect-multiplier: 3 Receive interval: 100ms Transmission interval: 100ms Echo receive interval: 50ms* Can anyone give me a hint of a clean solution? Thanks! Changrong Wu

1 0