June 2024 - frog - lists.frrouting.org

FRR 10.0 Release
by Jafar Al-Gharaibeh 01 Jul '24

01 Jul '24

Dear FRR Community, We are pleased to announce FRR 10.0 major release. For release notes please visit: https://frrouting.org/release/10.0/ https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/releases/tag/frr-10.0 In this release, we are deprecating a couple of features. Make sure to go over "Breaking Changes" in the release notes. Cheers, The FRR Development Team!

1 1

VRRP Object Tracking / Routes dependent on VRRP state
by Alasdair Muckart 28 Jun '24

28 Jun '24

Is there any way in FRR to make routes depend on the state of a VRRP instance? I have an issue where I can't bind static routes to the VRRP interface, because they get jammed in 'inactive' state, but I have a pair of routers acting as the gateway to a network (where I can't run a dynamic routing protocol or BFD). That other network has a static route to me pointing at the VIP, but I have no way to influence the OSPF routes I send to the rest of my network based on the VRRP state. If I leave everything ECMP then half the time I'll get to the router that's the VRRP backup and the traffic blackholes because it's asymmetrical and the firewalls chuck it away. If I weight things so that the path through the VRRP primary is preferred, everything breaks if the VRRP fails over, which defeats the purpose. On appliance routers (Cisco, Junper, whatever) it's standard to be able to use object tracking to withdraw routes if the VRRP is in backup state. Is there any way to do this with FRR? Thanks -- Alasdair Muckart (he/him) Network Infrastructure Architect Catalyst.Net Limited - Expert Open Source Solutions Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group company DDI: +64 4 897 7794 | Mobile: +64 22 638 5141 | Tel: +64 4 499 2267 | www.catalyst.net.nz CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged, confidential or copyright information. If you are not the named recipient, any use, reliance upon, disclosure or copying of this email or its attachments is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please reply via email or call +64 4 499 2267.

1 0

bgp yang model
by Feng Lei 20 Jun '24

20 Jun '24

hello, mailto. I am working retrofite the bgp command to northbound api. I meet a issue and i did'nt know about libyang well. I use yang/frr-bgp.yang generate skeleton code. i execute in vtysh > localhost.localdomain(config)# router bgp 200 % Failed to edit configuration. YANG error(s): Error: YANG version 1.1 expects all includes in main module, includes in submodules (frr-bgp-common-structure) are not necessary. Error: YANG version 1.1 expects all includes in main module, includes in submodules (frr-bgp-neighbor) are not necessary. Error: YANG version 1.1 expects all includes in main module, includes in submodules (frr-bgp-neighbor) are not necessary. Error: YANG version 1.1 expects all includes in main module, includes in submodules (frr-bgp-peer-group) are not necessary. Error: YANG version 1.1 expects all includes in main module, includes in submodules (frr-bgp-peer-group) are not necessary. Error: YANG version 1.1 expects all includes in main module, includes in submodules (frr-bgp-bmp) are not necessary. Path: Schema location "/frr-routing:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol". Error: Predicate missing for list "control-plane-protocol" in path "/frr-routing:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/frr-bgp:bgp". this means if i should write bgpd yang model in myself and refer to isisd. hope your reply! 综合接入冯磊深圳震有科技股份有限公司座机：0755-86099888-1198 电话：13045884882 网址：http://www.genew.com 地址：深圳市南山区高新南区科苑南路3176号彩讯科技大厦6层邮箱：fenglei(a)genew.com

1 0

messages as attachement
by Erwan David 12 Jun '24

12 Jun '24

Hello, I receive almost all messages of the lists as only the footer, wtith the message as an attachment. That makes reading the list complicated, maybe something to configure in the mailing list software For recent messages : <mailman.35.1718217587.840.frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> is such, but <CAP3NpQufftUKGBcB84yD0TOJRGh=8+TPZhJvBT=8vYM6Yq8uew(a)mail.gmail.com> is not. -- Erwan David

1 0

Re: [FROG] Migration scripts for FRR from Quagga
by Donald Sharp 12 Jun '24

12 Jun '24

In general you should just be able to use the Quagga configs directly in FRR(There are a couple caveats of course ). I am not aware of any conversion/migration scripts though. Have you tried just loading the config and seeing what happens? Then comparing a show run to the saved config? donald On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 4:29 PM Doug Tucker via frog < frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Doug Tucker <doug.tucker(a)navigaglobal.com> > To: "frog(a)lists.frrouting.org" <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 19:23:33 +0000 > Subject: Migration scripts for FRR from Quagga > I am needing to undertake migrating from all of my quagga instances to > frr. I have read through the general documentation but before I started > from scratch I thought I would see if there were some migration/conversion > scripts available for existing quagga installations. Thank you for your > assistance. > > *Doug Tucker* > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Doug Tucker via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> > To: "frog(a)lists.frrouting.org" <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 19:23:33 +0000 > Subject: [FROG] Migration scripts for FRR from Quagga > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog >

2 5

Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state
by Alasdair Muckart 11 Jun '24

11 Jun '24

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 I figured out what's happening. FRR (I'm assuming zebra) really doesn't like having routes bound to VRRP interfaces. It works so long as everything is up, but if there's a VRRP state transition and the VRRP interface or the underlying interface go away, zebra stops redistributing any routes into the kernel table at all until FRR is completely stopped and started again. It does still run the protocols, I could see static and connected routes on my problem box in the OSPF routes on its neighbour, it just wouldn't put anything in the kernel table on the problem box until I removed the static routes and restarted everything. Adding the static routes without an interface specified works fine, but doesn't quite do what I want, which is for the routes to be withdrawn when the VRRP goes down. I guess I'll have to script that somehow. Thanks. Alasdair Muckart via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> writes: > [1. message/rfc822] > From: Alasdair Muckart <alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz> > Subject: Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state > To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 19:09:52 +1200 (14 hours, 57 minutes, 32 seconds ago) > Reply-To: alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz > Flags: seen, list, personal > Maildir: /catalyst/Lists/Frog > > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > [2. text/plain] > > And now all three routes are stuck in "inactive" state, this persists even if > I restart FRR. > > Advice on how to debug this further would be greatly appreciated. As it > stands, FRR is proving far too brittle for me to put into production even in > the very basic use case I've got it deployed in now and I'm not sure why. > > Thanks. > > --- cut --- > S 10.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 00:00:08 > S 172.16.0.0/12 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 00:00:08 > S 192.168.0.0/16 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 00:00:08 > --- cut --- > > FRR knows about the next-hop: > --- cut --- > # show ip route 192.168.146.134 > Routing entry for 192.168.146.128/29 > Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0, best > Last update 00:37:33 ago > * directly connected, enp6s0f3 > --- cut --- > > VRRP is working, and this node is the master > --- cut --- > # show vrrp 2 > > Virtual Router ID 2 > Protocol Version 3 > Autoconfigured No > Shutdown No > Interface enp6s0f3 > VRRP interface (v4) vrrp4-1-2 > VRRP interface (v6) None > Primary IP (v4) 192.168.146.130 > Primary IP (v6) :: > Virtual MAC (v4) 00:00:5e:00:01:02 > Virtual MAC (v6) 00:00:5e:00:02:02 > Status (v4) Master > Status (v6) Initialize > Priority 110 > Effective Priority (v4) 110 > Effective Priority (v6) 110 > Preempt Mode Yes > Accept Mode Yes > Checksum with IPv4 Pseudoheader Yes > Advertisement Interval 1000 ms > Master Advertisement Interval (v4) Rx 1000 ms (stale) > Master Advertisement Interval (v6) Rx 0 ms (stale) > Advertisements Tx (v4) 8654 > Advertisements Tx (v6) 0 > Advertisements Rx (v4) 28 > Advertisements Rx (v6) 0 > Gratuitous ARP Tx (v4) 2 > Neigh. Adverts Tx (v6) 0 > State transitions (v4) 4 > State transitions (v6) 0 > Skew Time (v4) 570 ms > Skew Time (v6) 0 ms > Master Down Interval (v4) 3570 ms > Master Down Interval (v6) 0 ms > IPv4 Addresses 1 > .................................. 192.168.146.129 > IPv6 Addresses 0 > --- cut --- > > > Alasdair Muckart via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> writes: > >> [1. message/rfc822] >> From: Alasdair Muckart <alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz> >> Subject: Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state >> To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org >> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:53:26 +1200 (9 hours, 16 minutes, 26 seconds ago) >> Reply-To: alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz >> Flags: seen, list, personal >> Maildir: /catalyst/Lists/Frog >> >> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] >> [2. text/plain] >> >> If I delete the route and re-add it, it works so I'm not sure what dropped it >> into an "inactive" state. >> >> Interface information: >> >> Configuration: >> --- cut --- >> interface enp6s0f3 >> vrrp 2 >> vrrp 2 priority 110 >> vrrp 2 ip 192.168.146.129 >> exit >> --- cut --- >> >> Show interfaces from vtysh >> --- cut --- >> # show interface enp6s0f3 >> Interface enp6s0f3 is up, line protocol is up >> Link ups: 15 last: 2024/06/10 17:29:11.53 >> Link downs: 2 last: 2024/06/08 04:35:15.39 >> vrf: default >> Description: to cat-wlgwil-prod-ffw via old network >> index 9 metric 0 mtu 1500 speed 1000 txqlen 1000 >> flags: <UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> >> Type: Ethernet >> HWaddr: 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 >> inet 192.168.146.130/29 >> inet6 fe80::923c:b3ff:fe3f:da16/64 >> Interface Type Other >> Interface Slave Type None >> protodown: off >> >> # show interface vrrp4-1-2 >> Interface vrrp4-1-2 is up, line protocol is up >> Link ups: 10 last: 2024/06/10 17:22:50.29 >> Link downs: 5 last: 2024/06/08 04:35:22.37 >> vrf: default >> Description: VRRP facing cat-wlgwil-prod-ffw on old network >> index 24 metric 0 mtu 1500 speed 1000 txqlen 1000 >> flags: <UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> >> Type: Ethernet >> HWaddr: 00:00:5e:00:01:02 >> inet 192.168.146.129/32 unnumbered >> inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:102/64 >> Interface Type macvlan >> Interface Slave Type None >> protodown: off >> Parent interface: enp6s0f3 >> --- cut --- >> >> IP link and address info from OS. >> --- cut --- >> # ip link show dev enp6s0f3 >> 9: enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP mode DEFAULT group 300 qlen 1000 >> link/ether 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >> >> # ip a show dev enp6s0f3 >> 9: enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group 300 qlen 1000 >> link/ether 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >> inet 192.168.146.130/29 brd 192.168.146.135 scope global enp6s0f3 >> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever >> inet6 fe80::923c:b3ff:fe3f:da16/64 scope link >> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever >> >> # ip link show dev vrrp4-1-2 >> 24: vrrp4-1-2@enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP mode DEFAULT group 300 qlen 1000 >> link/ether 00:00:5e:00:01:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >> >> # ip a show dev vrrp4-1-2 >> 24: vrrp4-1-2@enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group 300 qlen 1000 >> link/ether 00:00:5e:00:01:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >> inet 192.168.146.129/32 scope global vrrp4-1-2 >> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever >> inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:102/64 scope link >> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever >> --- cut --- >> >> Alasdair Muckart via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> writes: >> >>> [1. message/rfc822] >>> From: Alasdair Muckart <alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz> >>> Subject: Static route stuck in 'inactive' state >>> To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org >>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:10:17 +1200 (16 hours, 43 minutes, 9 seconds ago) >>> Reply-To: alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz >>> Flags: seen, list, personal >>> Maildir: /catalyst/Lists/Frog >>> >>> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] >>> [2. text/plain] >>> I have a static route that's stuck in 'inactive' state and not being inserted >>> into the kernel routing table, and I can't figure out why. >>> >>> Can anyone shed light on this? >>> >>> FRRouting 10.0 on Linux(5.15.0-112-generic), Ubuntu 22.04. >>> >>> I have three static routes in my configuration: >>> >>> --- cut --- >>> ip route 10.0.0.0/8 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 >>> ip route 172.16.0.0/12 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 >>> ip route 192.168.0.0/16 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 >>> --- cut --- >>> >>> Two of them work but the 192.168.0.0/16 route is stuck "inactive" in the >>> output of 'show ip route static': >>> >>> --- cut --- >>> Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, L - local, S - static, >>> R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, >>> T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, F - PBR, >>> f - OpenFabric, t - Table-Direct, >>> > - selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup >>> t - trapped, o - offload failure >>> >>> S> 10.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 >>> via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 >>> S> 172.16.0.0/12 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 >>> via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 >>> S 192.168.0.0/16 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 01:22:16 >>> --- cut --- >>> >>> Looking at the routes on the machine, I see routes for the 10/8 and 172.16/12, >>> but not 192.168/16: >>> >>> --- cut --- >>> 10.0.0.0/8 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink >>> 172.16.0.0/12 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink >>> --- cut --- >>> >>> Thanks. - -- Alasdair Muckart (he/him) Network Infrastructure Architect Catalyst.Net Limited - Expert Open Source Solutions Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group company DDI: +64 4 897 7794 | Mobile: +64 22 638 5141 | Tel: +64 4 499 2267 | www.catalyst.net.nz CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged, confidential or copyright information. If you are not the named recipient, any use, reliance upon, disclosure or copying of this email or its attachments is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please reply via email or call +64 4 499 2267. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJUBAEBCgA+FiEEu4g3jwJ68cPCdgH9iBAgH4ERwwMFAmZo4bcgHGFsYXNkYWly bXVja2FydEBjYXRhbHlzdC5uZXQubnoACgkQiBAgH4ERwwPwOw/6A0lZIwxvYSso rqUgR8WCjWgbfD0z9f1IOtIwtMTvLL50v8YOCORf0FOxpQr5PSkFTweBr7Kt3W61 u9D0M2a3UxS3mHcuEMqnk5n+00rDc8fyL0V0d1MADScmurejjK4iw1Yw/itR+m+/ v9mod6ctvYtJZhqinE8MKoVGBqgeCXoF8Mb5UEIZhUkFJdpe7m7+6fgMdUFS0g/J MajkebRZAkDAlS4BsNL239YhPTqYqypJTe4btiZkSE2To9HBDQzFcQiJSJu+9vns KjEqs55i8EGjQaR5o/XPu11uNhHCHrKW/c9QCoIqdIBv81S7m5/wONaYPdxw/7zs uYfWMulCcD2eKfBb7wt2c4j5nG7F5Xt1w+TGqIGDvSLZ2+TF8g46UjyaoVPlBD19 +0dNKaUMjUe7FISbK1bjnJgpghyy0d+oGm/zD5kbLRkYTKqL6JFI09Sk4ev1E7WJ 5BnV2QMm1nvH75Rb4AiOEOAQt1OpfHbfpPGPkvLii0ExNXxEeCDfE9gsDks/5bdu 19Vkl9GQYgAfLFvgJJV48rlYvlYZuM8JIEOldiO+dHm99+2dkwXup1Z370Fz0APl iuTJ9sAMCvlsT2BSCRbOzCC12Nqq5TVRPCFUKo3LBjJq3aMhyDdHkNiWmKF3NGqc IqylC7kVnepPVUlZ8knJd8aAP6Shiwo= =dbH/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state
by Alasdair Muckart 11 Jun '24

11 Jun '24

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 And now all three routes are stuck in "inactive" state, this persists even if I restart FRR. Advice on how to debug this further would be greatly appreciated. As it stands, FRR is proving far too brittle for me to put into production even in the very basic use case I've got it deployed in now and I'm not sure why. Thanks. - --- cut --- S 10.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 00:00:08 S 172.16.0.0/12 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 00:00:08 S 192.168.0.0/16 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 00:00:08 - --- cut --- FRR knows about the next-hop: - --- cut --- # show ip route 192.168.146.134 Routing entry for 192.168.146.128/29 Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0, best Last update 00:37:33 ago * directly connected, enp6s0f3 - --- cut --- VRRP is working, and this node is the master - --- cut --- # show vrrp 2 Virtual Router ID 2 Protocol Version 3 Autoconfigured No Shutdown No Interface enp6s0f3 VRRP interface (v4) vrrp4-1-2 VRRP interface (v6) None Primary IP (v4) 192.168.146.130 Primary IP (v6) :: Virtual MAC (v4) 00:00:5e:00:01:02 Virtual MAC (v6) 00:00:5e:00:02:02 Status (v4) Master Status (v6) Initialize Priority 110 Effective Priority (v4) 110 Effective Priority (v6) 110 Preempt Mode Yes Accept Mode Yes Checksum with IPv4 Pseudoheader Yes Advertisement Interval 1000 ms Master Advertisement Interval (v4) Rx 1000 ms (stale) Master Advertisement Interval (v6) Rx 0 ms (stale) Advertisements Tx (v4) 8654 Advertisements Tx (v6) 0 Advertisements Rx (v4) 28 Advertisements Rx (v6) 0 Gratuitous ARP Tx (v4) 2 Neigh. Adverts Tx (v6) 0 State transitions (v4) 4 State transitions (v6) 0 Skew Time (v4) 570 ms Skew Time (v6) 0 ms Master Down Interval (v4) 3570 ms Master Down Interval (v6) 0 ms IPv4 Addresses 1 .................................. 192.168.146.129 IPv6 Addresses 0 - --- cut --- Alasdair Muckart via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> writes: > [1. message/rfc822] > From: Alasdair Muckart <alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz> > Subject: Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state > To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:53:26 +1200 (9 hours, 16 minutes, 26 seconds ago) > Reply-To: alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz > Flags: seen, list, personal > Maildir: /catalyst/Lists/Frog > > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > [2. text/plain] > > If I delete the route and re-add it, it works so I'm not sure what dropped it > into an "inactive" state. > > Interface information: > > Configuration: > --- cut --- > interface enp6s0f3 > vrrp 2 > vrrp 2 priority 110 > vrrp 2 ip 192.168.146.129 > exit > --- cut --- > > Show interfaces from vtysh > --- cut --- > # show interface enp6s0f3 > Interface enp6s0f3 is up, line protocol is up > Link ups: 15 last: 2024/06/10 17:29:11.53 > Link downs: 2 last: 2024/06/08 04:35:15.39 > vrf: default > Description: to cat-wlgwil-prod-ffw via old network > index 9 metric 0 mtu 1500 speed 1000 txqlen 1000 > flags: <UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> > Type: Ethernet > HWaddr: 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 > inet 192.168.146.130/29 > inet6 fe80::923c:b3ff:fe3f:da16/64 > Interface Type Other > Interface Slave Type None > protodown: off > > # show interface vrrp4-1-2 > Interface vrrp4-1-2 is up, line protocol is up > Link ups: 10 last: 2024/06/10 17:22:50.29 > Link downs: 5 last: 2024/06/08 04:35:22.37 > vrf: default > Description: VRRP facing cat-wlgwil-prod-ffw on old network > index 24 metric 0 mtu 1500 speed 1000 txqlen 1000 > flags: <UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> > Type: Ethernet > HWaddr: 00:00:5e:00:01:02 > inet 192.168.146.129/32 unnumbered > inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:102/64 > Interface Type macvlan > Interface Slave Type None > protodown: off > Parent interface: enp6s0f3 > --- cut --- > > IP link and address info from OS. > --- cut --- > # ip link show dev enp6s0f3 > 9: enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP mode DEFAULT group 300 qlen 1000 > link/ether 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > > # ip a show dev enp6s0f3 > 9: enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group 300 qlen 1000 > link/ether 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet 192.168.146.130/29 brd 192.168.146.135 scope global enp6s0f3 > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > inet6 fe80::923c:b3ff:fe3f:da16/64 scope link > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > > # ip link show dev vrrp4-1-2 > 24: vrrp4-1-2@enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP mode DEFAULT group 300 qlen 1000 > link/ether 00:00:5e:00:01:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > > # ip a show dev vrrp4-1-2 > 24: vrrp4-1-2@enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group 300 qlen 1000 > link/ether 00:00:5e:00:01:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet 192.168.146.129/32 scope global vrrp4-1-2 > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:102/64 scope link > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > --- cut --- > > Alasdair Muckart via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> writes: > >> [1. message/rfc822] >> From: Alasdair Muckart <alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz> >> Subject: Static route stuck in 'inactive' state >> To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org >> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:10:17 +1200 (16 hours, 43 minutes, 9 seconds ago) >> Reply-To: alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz >> Flags: seen, list, personal >> Maildir: /catalyst/Lists/Frog >> >> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] >> [2. text/plain] >> I have a static route that's stuck in 'inactive' state and not being inserted >> into the kernel routing table, and I can't figure out why. >> >> Can anyone shed light on this? >> >> FRRouting 10.0 on Linux(5.15.0-112-generic), Ubuntu 22.04. >> >> I have three static routes in my configuration: >> >> --- cut --- >> ip route 10.0.0.0/8 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 >> ip route 172.16.0.0/12 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 >> ip route 192.168.0.0/16 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 >> --- cut --- >> >> Two of them work but the 192.168.0.0/16 route is stuck "inactive" in the >> output of 'show ip route static': >> >> --- cut --- >> Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, L - local, S - static, >> R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, >> T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, F - PBR, >> f - OpenFabric, t - Table-Direct, >> > - selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup >> t - trapped, o - offload failure >> >> S> 10.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 >> via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 >> S> 172.16.0.0/12 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 >> via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 >> S 192.168.0.0/16 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 01:22:16 >> --- cut --- >> >> Looking at the routes on the machine, I see routes for the 10/8 and 172.16/12, >> but not 192.168/16: >> >> --- cut --- >> 10.0.0.0/8 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink >> 172.16.0.0/12 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink >> --- cut --- >> >> Thanks. - -- Alasdair Muckart (he/him) Network Infrastructure Architect Catalyst.Net Limited - Expert Open Source Solutions Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group company DDI: +64 4 897 7794 | Mobile: +64 22 638 5141 | Tel: +64 4 499 2267 | www.catalyst.net.nz CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged, confidential or copyright information. If you are not the named recipient, any use, reliance upon, disclosure or copying of this email or its attachments is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please reply via email or call +64 4 499 2267. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJUBAEBCgA+FiEEu4g3jwJ68cPCdgH9iBAgH4ERwwMFAmZoBE4gHGFsYXNkYWly bXVja2FydEBjYXRhbHlzdC5uZXQubnoACgkQiBAgH4ERwwOkJRAAgmzzt7xm/Y8A vWbmkgcHPKVKr0ebIWkecN7ObWDEklcsYb55LuNzN/gpYt8UGRGI8rNP1wp/F5MR 1zE7xXDVN3TiiOKiZy2MCsn+1iv6qv18+ZUPMoZcGsu+0H8zwTsHgfz3+GFSMEZS jWEChIheW9XpnuWsrqxK8E8mmGzKvKsYQz5gNXzZTVSpz0yT2dg9ivDrMpnKMxdu HMrUcufzw00Fpe8WI4frckcc5tPqcAGGcEhE2J7jYGJb39rFu3Cy6SijyQurrolB 9iBM8v8sRlSvCAG7BNJv9fOhRt3iVucBPifQg2ld4xozLdrm4SJ5HaFnEiyBuXzZ au7L0jgJXTI2pFFy33SiidZ4lYSnQGusIo2T+jKafrq/j5Wzl5bEaVp+Qg7r4IB1 l8MD7gEJlANM4rrpvrnmlZfW9ywBAowDE4AopSHywGQVWkKgmI4As/yUGKVHJpUP QnTPwMQtjpGZ+SL9CLEbdNgc5otFAiDa006inux/aKAfMtyWHeTyPBuAjm/W97s8 d+gDunQLTe3jsKl0NTJW4PeG1c0ehe1h2KVw6OpcB01RMpIe2RIgC9DtDh3urY3f ByM2s6/p9P5HbicXKMY4JjtD/3m2zb75URViqUfrTjRdX9sdkc0GifAqu+6+hX1c 0nrriafJC6tLmcJj+hIUHe4uEFCCw0M= =y7S6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state
by Alasdair Muckart 10 Jun '24

10 Jun '24

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 If I delete the route and re-add it, it works so I'm not sure what dropped it into an "inactive" state. Interface information: Configuration: - --- cut --- interface enp6s0f3 vrrp 2 vrrp 2 priority 110 vrrp 2 ip 192.168.146.129 exit - --- cut --- Show interfaces from vtysh - --- cut --- # show interface enp6s0f3 Interface enp6s0f3 is up, line protocol is up Link ups: 15 last: 2024/06/10 17:29:11.53 Link downs: 2 last: 2024/06/08 04:35:15.39 vrf: default Description: to cat-wlgwil-prod-ffw via old network index 9 metric 0 mtu 1500 speed 1000 txqlen 1000 flags: <UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> Type: Ethernet HWaddr: 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 inet 192.168.146.130/29 inet6 fe80::923c:b3ff:fe3f:da16/64 Interface Type Other Interface Slave Type None protodown: off # show interface vrrp4-1-2 Interface vrrp4-1-2 is up, line protocol is up Link ups: 10 last: 2024/06/10 17:22:50.29 Link downs: 5 last: 2024/06/08 04:35:22.37 vrf: default Description: VRRP facing cat-wlgwil-prod-ffw on old network index 24 metric 0 mtu 1500 speed 1000 txqlen 1000 flags: <UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> Type: Ethernet HWaddr: 00:00:5e:00:01:02 inet 192.168.146.129/32 unnumbered inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:102/64 Interface Type macvlan Interface Slave Type None protodown: off Parent interface: enp6s0f3 - --- cut --- IP link and address info from OS. - --- cut --- # ip link show dev enp6s0f3 9: enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP mode DEFAULT group 300 qlen 1000 link/ether 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff # ip a show dev enp6s0f3 9: enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group 300 qlen 1000 link/ether 90:3c:b3:3f:da:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.146.130/29 brd 192.168.146.135 scope global enp6s0f3 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever inet6 fe80::923c:b3ff:fe3f:da16/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever # ip link show dev vrrp4-1-2 24: vrrp4-1-2@enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP mode DEFAULT group 300 qlen 1000 link/ether 00:00:5e:00:01:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff # ip a show dev vrrp4-1-2 24: vrrp4-1-2@enp6s0f3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group 300 qlen 1000 link/ether 00:00:5e:00:01:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.146.129/32 scope global vrrp4-1-2 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:102/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever - --- cut --- Alasdair Muckart via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> writes: > [1. message/rfc822] > From: Alasdair Muckart <alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz> > Subject: Static route stuck in 'inactive' state > To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:10:17 +1200 (16 hours, 43 minutes, 9 seconds ago) > Reply-To: alasdairmuckart(a)catalyst.net.nz > Flags: seen, list, personal > Maildir: /catalyst/Lists/Frog > > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > [2. text/plain] > I have a static route that's stuck in 'inactive' state and not being inserted > into the kernel routing table, and I can't figure out why. > > Can anyone shed light on this? > > FRRouting 10.0 on Linux(5.15.0-112-generic), Ubuntu 22.04. > > I have three static routes in my configuration: > > --- cut --- > ip route 10.0.0.0/8 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 > ip route 172.16.0.0/12 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 > ip route 192.168.0.0/16 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 > --- cut --- > > Two of them work but the 192.168.0.0/16 route is stuck "inactive" in the > output of 'show ip route static': > > --- cut --- > Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, L - local, S - static, > R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, > T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, F - PBR, > f - OpenFabric, t - Table-Direct, > > - selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup > t - trapped, o - offload failure > > S> 10.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 > via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 > S> 172.16.0.0/12 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 > via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 > S 192.168.0.0/16 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 01:22:16 > --- cut --- > > Looking at the routes on the machine, I see routes for the 10/8 and 172.16/12, > but not 192.168/16: > > --- cut --- > 10.0.0.0/8 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink > 172.16.0.0/12 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink > --- cut --- > > Thanks. - -- Alasdair Muckart (he/him) Network Infrastructure Architect Catalyst.Net Limited - Expert Open Source Solutions Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group company DDI: +64 4 897 7794 | Mobile: +64 22 638 5141 | Tel: +64 4 499 2267 | www.catalyst.net.nz CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged, confidential or copyright information. If you are not the named recipient, any use, reliance upon, disclosure or copying of this email or its attachments is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please reply via email or call +64 4 499 2267. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJUBAEBCgA+FiEEu4g3jwJ68cPCdgH9iBAgH4ERwwMFAmZnf9MgHGFsYXNkYWly bXVja2FydEBjYXRhbHlzdC5uZXQubnoACgkQiBAgH4ERwwNYHxAAkW5jzznEMzum ekNwRAqeTD91tgDOJsxwYXALuJw8WsRyJYZw9LsPCLzmoFrbn2ioOpDZUmGAoIru iY39iQ3gxiPVKJJqDJ6p15xMtw/iDu1GBZvW9qy2O2FtIZISw8Xg14bsaoyVXesX p4zqgX3l6mDjxvvRQPKP90qmq7KuTRIBVr8HaZKRcFT4w4vf1BPm9y1IFzCt2RT3 3F5i1B5YSbJAXsMjSe5qbUNdOPgmYwgtUP4hckmtpT2xM5eO1zNmYoIcJfEhjKvf NZNXB9Yd4eGAMt0tcl+PcHFfgEC0fIow2ksKks2dnosKcdxR20u9HcYFi77ksUOU /VLz8t6BKesbLRO8NrDmBis6BMpJxtfOZ+bK+h7O+G58w1/cIbTHxK9BDCIFIhBz DExfdXUu0vUrtG5TlzGL+inRyTNVjGYH2NwBJcY98sMFqz9KyOh8ilhW4CMIsndO xTNZ79zQnfpxBMAJQKMrO0u7pPplrrR4UzEGUxODiCjmM5EcvlijNIgIXAhRA6+X eUh8OjjGy1yFv0V3b28QZ59mu7dsT7PpZ6nI0XOJL2Zb0bEP9OVZgl2/7XWzGd6F AcVwW3zG0Dm+14L21H/l2NnYpXUnNQQeyQNtGbDQWNfFosq7UoyQubW+u449Muf6 FoCw1jLbA7cr5oVBFxTnVJY93RytwOc= =9eeM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [FROG] Static route stuck in 'inactive' state
by Jafar Al-Gharaibeh 10 Jun '24

10 Jun '24

What is your interface configuration? On 6/10/24 00:10, Alasdair Muckart via frog wrote: > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog

1 0

Static route stuck in 'inactive' state
by Alasdair Muckart 09 Jun '24

09 Jun '24

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 I have a static route that's stuck in 'inactive' state and not being inserted into the kernel routing table, and I can't figure out why. Can anyone shed light on this? FRRouting 10.0 on Linux(5.15.0-112-generic), Ubuntu 22.04. I have three static routes in my configuration: - --- cut --- ip route 10.0.0.0/8 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 ip route 172.16.0.0/12 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 ip route 192.168.0.0/16 192.168.146.134 vrrp4-1-2 - --- cut --- Two of them work but the 192.168.0.0/16 route is stuck "inactive" in the output of 'show ip route static': - --- cut --- Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, L - local, S - static, R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, F - PBR, f - OpenFabric, t - Table-Direct, > - selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup t - trapped, o - offload failure S> 10.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 S> 172.16.0.0/12 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 (recursive), weight 1, 01:22:16 via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 onlink, weight 1, 01:22:16 S 192.168.0.0/16 [1/0] via 192.168.146.134, vrrp4-1-2 inactive, weight 1, 01:22:16 - --- cut --- Looking at the routes on the machine, I see routes for the 10/8 and 172.16/12, but not 192.168/16: - --- cut --- 10.0.0.0/8 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink 172.16.0.0/12 nhid 84 via 192.168.146.134 dev vrrp4-1-2 proto static metric 20 onlink - --- cut --- Thanks. - -- Alasdair Muckart (he/him) Network Infrastructure Architect Catalyst.Net Limited - Expert Open Source Solutions Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group company DDI: +64 4 897 7794 | Mobile: +64 22 638 5141 | Tel: +64 4 499 2267 | www.catalyst.net.nz CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged, confidential or copyright information. If you are not the named recipient, any use, reliance upon, disclosure or copying of this email or its attachments is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please reply via email or call +64 4 499 2267. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJUBAEBCgA+FiEEu4g3jwJ68cPCdgH9iBAgH4ERwwMFAmZmi/kgHGFsYXNkYWly bXVja2FydEBjYXRhbHlzdC5uZXQubnoACgkQiBAgH4ERwwOYkw//UUAT6ranjqAV vRfiAyxy2HTJKWTdGDkejYcuScck64wLy3gdbhXSdDEjntEhcPyky3xhqR65rLgT SQR9HHfRYBzh48K/MMYvl70JYPMFMzaOIROFZl24hIkDXSWLA+LLeWRdsxd+FThx MrULrWO/EVeauMkOisZRvYbNwENIb5NmEGVpvmISeybb8oX5Edi3d6EVKyKra3oG JEoeEZgM8sdTiDmPaGS5QSF4oe9BYe1+K0odd61lsc2Jaft5F3cBzUaHaDEMbY9/ 0AXKhakGVPXFjOFO7j3MXewJTkhqJhSDaqVy0SRgu4S3QURsr5kVZTtyfyZfIBBa L2r46JhZWrvso6Eeilgnnc9B2GiPalEYvV1q3GugCeBubfGhBo/MPytkgQtGJiUQ h8ZxCTeXuaeVFFfnZSiF2BTR8gxdwl1+08adoVUTS5SEe5ZpDDkIaeFFJWvkBz5v XWzgyaflAdNLh/mKs8ueBdnNTiV5cbQyd6a+0e1F4H3EIRJlQOEM2c8S8xOT1toB JRU45w2yeB+DG50majZDNQ8/mUd83xnPxuRcFqN5WbtuEbARH6AhV1a2WKwWFDyI N/4s+BqiDDLPP86DHeTltgcHO+vOEjg4Uvht9aJouHmK4TEbo5t4pg/5LzIfiYcY kBeNr8Mki+r6wK2T5dMPYA/6NeOzvFE= =cFqs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0