[dev] FRR vrf, multi-instance

[Donald Sharp]

A) OSPF v2 supports both MI and VRF's.  Use one or the other, but not
at the same time.  No-one has done the work to make IS-IS vrf aware at
this point in time(patches welcome! HA!)

For B, I am not really quite sure what you are asking.  I guess that
you are asking does FRR support l3vpn's and EVPN in a VRF context and
yes it does.

For C, I do not understand your question.

As for logical router, just create linux namespaces and run separate
instances of FRR.

donald


On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Jia Chen <jchen1 at paloaltonetworks.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> A question about FRR way of supporting vrf, multi-instance, or logical router.
>
> A. OSPF/IS-IS multi-instance is a control plane concept, not forwarding
> B. VRF is both routing and forwarding, for example, L3vpn and EVPN, which uses RT, RD in BGP updates
> C. Virtual router is a non-VPN instance, which does not require RT, RD
>
> Both B and C, has a one-to-one interface to routing instance mapping.
>
> Are A, B, C all supported by FRR?
>
> Juniper has a logical system (or router), which divided physical router into logical sub-routers. Each logical router has dedicated interface, routing protocols, routing and forwarding table. Are there equivalent in FRR?
>
> Thanks,
> Jay
>
>
>
> On 6/28/18, 9:31 AM, "dev on behalf of Donald Sharp" <dev-bounces at lists.frrouting.org on behalf of sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>     Mark -
>
>     Great idea, We'll start the meeting off with your talk.
>
>     thanks!
>
>     donald
>
>
>     On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mark Stapp <mjs at voltanet.io> wrote:
>     > Hi,
>     > I've been doing some work on the dataplane side of zebra, and I'd like to
>     > talk a bit about the approach and outline some of the possible next-steps.
>     > Could I have a few minutes at next week's dev meeting to introduce the
>     > topic? The broad goals are sort of:
>     >
>     > * to harden the interface that zebra has with the dataplane or -planes that
>     > are in use,
>     > * to improve support for remote dataplanes,
>     > * to allow dataplane/kernel updates to be moved to a dedicated pthread,
>     > * to improve integration of FPM, and to include more events
>     >
>     > I've been working at first just to support asynchronous route/fib updates,
>     > just to start exploring the possible approaches and to raise some questions.
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     > Mark
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > dev mailing list
>     > dev at lists.frrouting.org
>     > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_listinfo_dev&d=DwIGaQ&c=V9IgWpI5PvzTw83UyHGVSoW3Uc1MFWe5J8PTfkrzVSo&r=yetdj-aXQpuqTCJGs-93hOpK3740MIRXowfUNLByeos&m=0aLyQFqXsyUE3eFVSmsBMSQzPcFi8wkUtaBrS_9RhKM&s=rttXUUgi9mh45PL0z88r5pPfh1dDBfOaglxXATnOa-s&e=
>     >
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     dev mailing list
>     dev at lists.frrouting.org
>     https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.frrouting.org_listinfo_dev&d=DwIGaQ&c=V9IgWpI5PvzTw83UyHGVSoW3Uc1MFWe5J8PTfkrzVSo&r=yetdj-aXQpuqTCJGs-93hOpK3740MIRXowfUNLByeos&m=0aLyQFqXsyUE3eFVSmsBMSQzPcFi8wkUtaBrS_9RhKM&s=rttXUUgi9mh45PL0z88r5pPfh1dDBfOaglxXATnOa-s&e=
>
>