[frr] [PATCH 01/11] bgpd: BGP VRF processing handling

Donald Sharp sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com
Thu Jan 5 09:24:07 EST 2017


As stated earlier we felt that option #6 had these issues:

1) VRF in multiple places add confusion
2) Does not match any other industry vendor
3) Backwards Compatibility issues with what is already deployed today.

>From my perspective, option #6 is not compelling enough to implement
to break backwards compatibility

donald

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Philippe Guibert
<philippe.guibert at 6wind.com> wrote:
> Hello Lou,
>
> A pull request has been triggered.
>
> https://github.com/freerangerouting/frr/pull/44
>
> Regarding modifications done between this pull request and the last
> emission on quagga 1.1.0 release, some changes have been done:
> - adaptation for frr
> - new vty enhancements. this is a subset of all the commands depicted
> of option #6 of the following document:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w_ie2tNXCgn0N3ZNFGYTK6lJkwMmk_XN5yz33MMNNqM/edit
>
> *Here is the new vty brought:*
>
> router bgp AAA ! core instance
>    vrf <VRFNAME1>
>      rt {import|export|both} RTLIST
>      rd {VALUE}
>      maximum-path <>
>    exit-bgp-vrf
>    address-family vpnv4
>     network <> rd <> tag <>
>    exit-address-family
>  exit
>
> *About the behaviour :*
>
> If you do not have any VRF configured, it does not prevent you from
> doing route processing with network command.
> Even you can receive new entries.
> The result can be seen by following command:
>
> show bgp ipv4 vpn
>
>
> If you have VRF configured, and you have route target set, then you
> will do import processing.
> The result can be seen by following command:
>
> show ip bgp vrf <VRFNAME>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Philippe
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Lou Berger <lberger at labn.net> wrote:
>> Philippe,
>>
>> It would be good to hear how this fits in the the vrf config discussions we
>> had a month or two ago.  (Does anyone have a pointer to the resulting notes
>> handy?)
>>
>> I'd also like to ensure that it doesn't break the parallel functionality
>> already in the vnc code. I'm happy to test this  once you have a public repo
>> with the merged code available.
>>
>> Lou
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On January 5, 2017 2:54:03 AM Philippe Guibert <philippe.guibert at 6wind.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Donald,
>>>
>>> An other patch series is needed, prior to applying it:
>>>
>>> https://lists.nox.tf/pipermail/frr/2016-December/000275.html
>>>
>>> I aggregated both series, and run CI testing
>>> Once it is done, I will make a pull request based on the aggregation of
>>> both.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Philippe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 2:41 AM, Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I could not get this patch to apply to either master or stable/2.0.
>>>> What should it be applied to?
>>>>
>>>> dohnald
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Vincent JARDIN
>>>> <vincent.jardin at 6wind.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 21/12/2016 à 15:13, Philippe Guibert a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please Philippe, can you send a v2 of your serie without such
>>>>> white-space/new line updates?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> frr mailing list
>>>>> frr at lists.nox.tf
>>>>> https://lists.nox.tf/listinfo/frr
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> frr mailing list
>>> frr at lists.nox.tf
>>> https://lists.nox.tf/listinfo/frr
>>
>>
>>




More information about the dev mailing list