[dev] FRR North bound API

[Mohammed Anzal K]

Hi Philippe,

Thanks for your inputs.

I am also interested in the use case of L3VPN/L2VPN for ODL-FRR interaction.

I would root for the approach mentioned by you in the first slide, of 
interfacing the zebra daemon for prefix handling, to ODL over gRPC.

Meanwhile, when are we planning to start with the bgpd specific north 
bound API related work ?

Is there any planned timeline for this feature request #2585 
<https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/issues/2585>- gRPC support for Zebra

Thanks

Anzal

On 19-12-2018 08:34 PM, Philippe Guibert wrote:
> Hi Anzal,
>
> About your question related to ODL-FRR interaction, may I know if you
> have a specific ODL service in mind ?
>
> I have come up with design proposals on ODL/FRR interaction for L3VPN
> and L2VPN in ODL service.
> Main points are:
> - rely on the new yang NB API ( using GRPc technology).
> - optional : extend L3VPN/L2VPN to Zebra, via remote dataplane
>
> You can find specific proposal in [0]
>
> Anzal, or everyone else in the FRR community,
> your comments are welcome,
>
> Thanks,
>
> Philippe
>
> [0] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18LkCGc8HAXto-c5IRT0NUBLmKRBYM6Oq6D5QNk_W-_k/edit#slide=id.g49ea94a8e7_0_0
>
> On 11/21/18, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Netconf is a configuration protocol and is not particularly suitable for
>> streaming data, one could use
>> YANG-push(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-20), has
>> been implemented in ODL’ Baron release
>> (https://docs.opendaylight.org/en/stable-boron/user-guide/yang-push.html)
>> however - general performance implications apply,
>> gRPC on another hand is de-facto industry standard for streaming telemetry
>> OpenConfig has defined number of frameworks.
>> Specifically for prefix injection, gRIBI
>> (https://github.com/openconfig/gribi/blob/master/doc/motivation.md) could be
>> considered, this what we (IETF) envisioned with I2RS effort but, reality is
>> different.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 17, 2018, at 12:26 AM, Philippe Guibert
>>> <philippe.guibert at 6wind.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Anzal,
>>>
>>> I agree with your proposal, with some concerns however.
>>>
>>> I presented a few weeks ago at FRR weekly meetings, some slides about
>>> what would be the mechanisms involved for an SDN controller to be able
>>> to use FRR as BGP speaker. ODL can be the target, obviously. See in
>>> [0]
>>>
>>> The yang solution applied to BGP northbound API has been proposed.
>>>
>>> However, there were two remarks:
>>> - on the data exchanged between SDN and FRR.
>>> What was ok was for configuration ( BGP, VPN, BGP peers, ...), since
>>> it fits well with BGP NB API.
>>>
>>> However, at one moment, SDN had to populate the IPs information coming
>>> from its VMs. The best solution was to use an other API plugged into
>>> ZEBRA ( and not BGP), so that this IP information could be seen as a
>>> remote dataplane. Here, the API is not well defined yet. Should this
>>> API be equipped with Yang too?
>>>
>>> - on the constraints between SDN and FRR. Some API require performance.
>>> For instance, will yang fit well when SDN retrieves thousands of
>>> prefix entries ?
>>>
>>> Remember that if you use a netconf server like netopeer, the data flow
>>> will look like the below:
>>> odl client <---> netopeer server <---> sysrepo server <---> bgp/zebra
>>> server
>>>
>>> which may not be the optimised path when you want to retrieve a lot of
>>> prefix entries. to be confirmed.
>>>
>>> There is an alternative. From document [1], figure 2 depicts a new NB
>>> API that bypasses sysrepo, and relies on scripts (it looks like a data
>>> format ( gRPC with protoBuf) carried close to sysrepo bgp data
>>> exchanges ( using protobuf) could be used to exchange with routing
>>> daemons.
>>> Because that path would bypass netopeer and sysrepo, while keeping a
>>> data format close to what is done with netconf ( though not all would
>>> be possible), retrieving prefix entries ( and why not configuration
>>> too) could be optimised. Here too, that path has to be confirmed.
>>> Which technology could suit well with FRR (also from licensing point
>>> of view..).
>>>
>>> Philippe
>>>
>>> [0]
>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/194vUFaWxmhfTpHyANHsP66Ffw0BQuJ9sI0ir2jrXyXo/edit#slide=id.g4538793aa3_0_0
>>> [1] https://github.com/opensourcerouting/frr/wiki/Architecture
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 1:59 PM anzal <mohammedanz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> @Renato Westphal
>>>> "https://github.com/opensourcerouting/frr/wiki/Architecture"
>>>>
>>>> Can this not be used to manage, configure and get updates from the FRR
>>>> routing daemons by an external NETCONF device, say an SDN controller ?
>>>>
>>>> Like ODL has a south bound Netconf -
>>>> https://docs.opendaylight.org/en/stable-oxygen/user-guide/netconf-user-guide.html
>>>>
>>>> So by using this I think ODL would be able to configure and get prefix
>>>> updates from the signalling daemons in FRR. Correct me if I am wrong
>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dev mailing list
>>>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>>>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dev mailing list
>>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at lists.frrouting.org
> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.frrouting.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20190114/601324b5/attachment.html>