- frog - lists.frrouting.org

Re: [FROG] help with quay.io/frrouting/frr:10.0.0 image
by Willy Manga 07 Jun '24

07 Jun '24

Hi, On 07/06/2024 16:00, frog-request(a)lists.frrouting.org wrote: > [...] > Hello friends: > > Im trying to use this docker image frr:10.0.0 but I can not get into the router. When I try to execute VTYSH got the following error: > / # vtysh > Exiting: failed to connect to any daemons. Perhaps no daemon is running. > Any solution for this? - did you mount at least /etc/frr/daemons ? - if yes, did you switch to _yes_ the daemon(s) you want to use? -- Willy Manga

1 0

OSPF Hello interval
by Susanne Will 07 Jun '24

07 Jun '24

2 1

OSPF Hello Inteval on dead links
by Susanne Will 29 May '24

29 May '24

2 3

Re: [FROG] Migration scripts for FRR from Quagga
by Leonardo 24 May '24

24 May '24

I usually set up the hostname in vtysh.conf and it overrides the hostnames in frr.conf. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Em 22/05/2024 20:33, Doug Tucker via frog escreveu: > The interesting thing is it did seem to read my zebra.conf, but > completely skipped the bgpd.conf. So I tried copying the contents of > the bgpd.conf into frr.conf and the daemon starts, and doing a show > run it looks pretty identical to quagga system side by side with a few > caveates (hostname for instance shows up twice with 2 different values).

1 0

OSPF Hello Interval on dead Links
by Susanne Will 24 May '24

24 May '24

3 2

Re: [FROG] MAC Flapping With VRRP on Linux
by Quentin Young 22 May '24

22 May '24

I'm glad you found a solution for your problem. If you would humor me, I'm still interested in your configuration, because the documentation doesn't mention any arp_ignore settings and if they are necessary I would like to document them. I find your setup interesting because I have a vague memory of similar deployments using VRRP on bonds and I don't recall needing to set those options. I am wondering if a kernel change happened, my memory is wrong, or if this really just is undocumented. If possible, could you send the results of: ip -d link showvrrp4-1-1@bond0 Thanks, Quentin On 5/19/24 8:03 PM, Alasdair Muckart via frog wrote: > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog

2 1

Re: [FROG] Configuring OSPF routing with not propagating docker routes
by Taavi Ansper 22 May '24

22 May '24

After my colleague added this line: network 192.168.2.48/32 area 0.0.0.0 The VM did not propagate the routes to others. My intention is not for any of the VM-s to become routers, but just for them to learn the routes for multiple gateways as I specified before. ---- Taavi Ansper taavi.ansper(a)cyber.ee On 22.05.24 14:40, Taavi Ansper via frog wrote: > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog

1 0

Re: [FROG] Configuring OSPF routing with not propagating docker routes
by Acee Lindem 22 May '24

22 May '24

Hi Taavi, I’m not sure what you are asking. If you want to form OSPF adjacencies on a network. the connecting interface cannot be passive as this solely advertises interface prefix in the Router-LSA - OSPF isn’t active on the interface. You can override the “default passive-interface” on an individual interface with the “no ip ospf passive” command on that interface. For example: interface r3-eth0 ip address 10.1.5.3/24 ip ospf dead-interval 30 ip ospf hello-interval 1 no ip ospf passive exit ! interface r3-eth1 ip address 10.1.6.3/24 ip ospf dead-interval 30 ip ospf hello-interval 1 no ip ospf passive exit ! interface r1-eth0 no ip ospf passive exit ! router ospf ospf router-id 3.3.3.3 passive-interface default network 10.1.5.0/24 area 0 network 10.1.6.0/24 area 1 distance 20 exit r3# show ip ospf neighbor Neighbor ID Pri State Up Time Dead Time Address Interface RXmtL RqstL DBsmL 2.2.2.2 1 Full/Backup 3m34s 29.414s 10.1.5.2 r3-eth0:10.1.5.3 0 0 0 2.2.2.2 1 Full/Backup 3m26s 29.414s 10.1.6.2 r3-eth1:10.1.6.3 0 0 0 Hope this helps, Acee > On May 22, 2024, at 04:18, Taavi Ansper via frog <frog(a)lists.frrouting.org> wrote: > > > From: Taavi Ansper <taavi.ansper(a)cyber.ee> > Subject: Configuring OSPF routing with not propagating docker routes > Date: May 22, 2024 at 04:18:15 EDT > To: frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > > > Hi > > (I also posted in the slack channel, sorry for cross-posting, don't know which one would be more active...) > > I am having a problem, where I have a core network, where I have a bunch of servers, but this network has two gateways, one for outbound connections on the same site and the second for an ipsec tunnel to another site, so if the local connection fails, it will route through the ipsec tunnel via the remote site.I have a problem with docker networks in this routing. As some of the hosts propagate these routes to other hosts and so If there is communication between a docker container and the host networking it tries to route through the network. This is the |frr.conf| file that is injected to the hosts. The RIP is legacy conf, as we moved from RIP to OSPF. As you can see we only have a single area, as we have a router on a stick topology, so we don't really need many areas. Currently the gitlab-test host cannot connect to the ospf network, because of the |passive-interface default| option, if I remove it, then it connects to the ospf area and now the docker routing also comes from other hosts. > > # Ansible managed # default to using syslog. /etc/rsyslog.d/45-frr.conf places the log in # /var/log/frr/frr.log # # Note: # FRR's configuration shell, vtysh, dynamically edits the live, in-memory # configuration while FRR is running. When instructed, vtysh will persist the # live configuration to this file, overwriting its contents. If you want to # avoid this, you can edit this file manually before starting FRR, or instruct # vtysh to write configuration to a different file. log syslog informational hostname gitlab-test password REDACTED enable password REDACTED # Router RIP configuration router rip distance 66 network 0.0.0.0/0 passive-interface default ! # Router OSPF configuration router ospf network 0.0.0.0/0 area 0.0.0.0 passive-interface default ospf router-id 10.0.8.43 ! # Network where this configuration is used. network enX0 ! # Interface options for interface found by ansible. interface enX0 ip ospf authentication message-digest ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 REDACTED ip ospf priority 0 ! > > > Can the host actually join the OSPF area if the passive-interface default is enabled? > > For example these routings are present that I do not want if I remove the passive-interface default and restart the frr.service: > > O 172.17.0.0/16 [110/10] is directly connected, docker0, weight 1, 00:01:06 O 172.18.0.0/16 [110/10] is directly connected, br-236817c46761, weight 1, 00:01:06 O>* 172.18.0.0/24 [110/20] via 192.168.2.25, enX0, weight 1, 00:00:46 O>* 172.19.0.0/16 [110/20] via 192.168.2.17, enX0, weight 1, 00:00:46 * via 192.168.2.44, enX0, weight 1, 00:00:46 Best regards > > -- > ---- > Taavi Ansper > taavi.ansper(a)cyber.ee > > > > > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog

2 1

Re: [FROG] Configuring OSPF routing with not propagating docker routes
by Taavi Ansper 22 May '24

22 May '24

Tested both adding not-advertise and distribute-list and these options did not help. router ospf network 0.0.0.0/0 area 0.0.0.0 ospf router-id A.B.C.D area 0.0.0.0 range 172.16.0.0/12 not-advertise distribute-list docker-filter out ! access-list docker-filter deny 172.16.0.0/12 ---- Taavi Ansper taavi.ansper(a)cyber.ee On 22.05.24 11:18, Taavi Ansper via frog wrote: > _______________________________________________ > frog mailing list > frog(a)lists.frrouting.org > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog

1 0

Configuring OSPF routing with not propagating docker routes
by Taavi Ansper 22 May '24

22 May '24

Hi (I also posted in the slack channel, sorry for cross-posting, don't know which one would be more active...) I am having a problem, where I have a core network, where I have a bunch of servers, but this network has two gateways, one for outbound connections on the same site and the second for an ipsec tunnel to another site, so if the local connection fails, it will route through the ipsec tunnel via the remote site.I have a problem with docker networks in this routing. As some of the hosts propagate these routes to other hosts and so If there is communication between a docker container and the host networking it tries to route through the network. This is the |frr.conf| file that is injected to the hosts. The RIP is legacy conf, as we moved from RIP to OSPF. As you can see we only have a single area, as we have a router on a stick topology, so we don't really need many areas. Currently the gitlab-test host cannot connect to the ospf network, because of the |passive-interface default| option, if I remove it, then it connects to the ospf area and now the docker routing also comes from other hosts. # Ansible managed # default to using syslog. /etc/rsyslog.d/45-frr.conf places the log in # /var/log/frr/frr.log # # Note: # FRR's configuration shell, vtysh, dynamically edits the live, in-memory # configuration while FRR is running. When instructed, vtysh will persist the # live configuration to this file, overwriting its contents. If you want to # avoid this, you can edit this file manually before starting FRR, or instruct # vtysh to write configuration to a different file. log syslog informational hostname gitlab-test password REDACTED enable password REDACTED # Router RIP configuration router rip distance 66 network 0.0.0.0/0 passive-interface default ! # Router OSPF configuration router ospf network 0.0.0.0/0 area 0.0.0.0 passive-interface default ospf router-id 10.0.8.43 ! # Network where this configuration is used. network enX0 ! # Interface options for interface found by ansible. interface enX0 ip ospf authentication message-digest ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 REDACTED ip ospf priority 0 ! Can the host actually join the OSPF area if the passive-interface default is enabled? For example these routings are present that I do not want if I remove the passive-interface default and restart the frr.service: O 172.17.0.0/16 [110/10] is directly connected, docker0, weight 1, 00:01:06 O 172.18.0.0/16 [110/10] is directly connected, br-236817c46761, weight 1, 00:01:06 O>* 172.18.0.0/24 [110/20] via 192.168.2.25, enX0, weight 1, 00:00:46 O>* 172.19.0.0/16 [110/20] via 192.168.2.17, enX0, weight 1, 00:00:46 * via 192.168.2.44, enX0, weight 1, 00:00:46 Best regards -- ---- Taavi Ansper taavi.ansper(a)cyber.ee

1 0