[dev] bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c change
lberger at labn.net
Wed Dec 12 10:15:57 EST 2018
On 12/12/2018 10:02 AM, Anton Degtyarev wrote:
> Hi Donald,
> Yes, Renato had contacted me about this as well. Thank you for adding
> the needed tests. I will redo my tests in the lab I had prepared for a
> customer use case.
please also run bgp_l3vpn_to_bgp_vrf -- this actually would have caught
the breakage in the first place, but wasn't being run as part of the
> The fix I had submitted was needed for locally defined subnets in a
> VRF which needed to be leaked into L3VPN. The issue I had observed was
> that they weren't -- because zebra thought that these subnets were not
> reachable. My theory (which worked for me and the customer) was that
> zebra was treating these prefixes wrong what, I thought, the patch
> corrected. Apologies for a high-level response -- I do not remember
> all details as this was a month ago.
I suspect that there are types/sub-types that need to be added to the
code if you make the original change...
> I will recreate the design I was testing again with the recent FRR
> master code and will give the new topotests a try as well.
Please also run the old one (the CI problem has been corrected and the
test is now being included.)
> Best regards,
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 17:30, Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com
> <mailto:sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>> wrote:
> Anton -
> Recently you had e23b9ef6d2 committed into FRR. During subsuquent
> testing it was noticed that this change broke various forms of
> route-leaking. In order to preserve current functionality, we have
> backed this commit out. My apologies for not catching these issues
> earlier on initial submission. In the meantime, we've added new tests
> to the topotests to catch this problem from happening in the future(
> see tests/topotests/ bgp-vrf-route-leak-basic and bgp_l3vpn_to_bgp_vrf
> Lou and I believe that your initial approach was probably the right
> thing to do but it needs to not break existing functionality. What
> was the use case you were needing this change for?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dev