[dev] BGP Views

[Renato Westphal]

Good point. Yes, running BGP views on separate processes should be
better in terms of multi-threading.

Regarding your first question, VRFs are more than just separate
routing tables. VRFs provide isolated network stacks, so you can have
for example interfaces with overlapping IP addresses and processes
bound to the same TCP/IP port/address tuples.

This reminds me that running two different bgpd instances on the same
VRF shouldn't be as simple as it seems. The second bgpd instance will
either need to specify a different BGP port (--bgp_port) or a
different local address (--listenon) to avoid conflicting TCP
listening sockets. This needs to be documented when removing support
for BGP views.

Cheers,
Renato.

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 4:16 PM, Richard Mayhew [directel]
<richard at directel.co.za> wrote:
> Hi Renato,
>
> I am sure that if there is a way to run the process without it exposing the routes to the local operating system it would work just fine. Admittedly I am not an expert in FRR, but wouldn't a VRF be the seen the same as a VIEW (Separate routing table)? I currently only run 2 views, 1 IPv4 and 1 IPv6 so it wouldn’t be a big deal if one had to run 2 separate bgpd's, maybe this would even work better in terms of multi-threading?
>
> Kind Regards
> Richard
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Renato Westphal [mailto:renato at opensourcerouting.org]
> Sent: Thursday, 06 September 2018 20:45
> To: Richard Mayhew [directel] <richard at directel.co.za>
> Cc: FRRouting-Dev <dev at lists.frrouting.org>; Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>
> Subject: Re: [dev] BGP Views
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> As discussed in issue #2900 [1], the same functionality of BGP views
> can be achieved by running a separate bgpd instance with --pathspace
> and --no_kernel. With this approach it should even be possible to run
> BGP views within VRFs. Do you think that would work for you? The only
> downside I see is the extra management overhead to deal with multiple
> instances (additional directories and configuration file, separate
> vtysh session to access the second bgpd instance, etc). Nothing that
> should be a big problem from my perspective.
>
> Cheers,
> Renato.
>
> [1] https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/issues/2900
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Richard Mayhew [directel]
> <richard at directel.co.za> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We make use of views so that the underlying operating system is not aware of
>> any routes held by the frr bgp process. We use FRR as our core network route
>> servers  between a number of core nodes to allow them to exchange routes
>> between them (filters...etc.)
>>
>> I think having the views feature is an advantage to FRR when running as a
>> route server since the underlining OS has no need to know or make use of the
>> routes held in the routing table.
>>
>> --
>> Kind Regards
>>
>> Richard Mayhew
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: dev <dev-bounces at lists.frrouting.org> on behalf of Donald Sharp
>> <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 6:23:12 PM
>> To: FRRouting-Dev
>> Subject: [dev] BGP Views
>>
>> In today's technical meeting we discussed removing the ability to have
>> views as an option in bgp.  Before we do any such thing we decided to
>> poll the community to see if anyone is using views and if so what is
>> the use case that they are using them under.  So if you have any
>> insight into this we would love to hear from you!
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> donald
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>> ________________________________
>> This e-mail is subject to the Directel Communications (Pty) Ltd electronic
>> communication legal notice, available at:
>> http://www.directel.co.za/emaildisclaimer
>> ________________________________
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Renato Westphal
> ________________________________
> This e-mail is subject to the Directel Communications (Pty) Ltd electronic communication legal notice, available at: http://www.directel.co.za/emaildisclaimer
> ________________________________



-- 
Renato Westphal