[dev] EIGRP

Quentin Young qlyoung at cumulusnetworks.com
Fri Jun 12 16:18:19 UTC 2020


Hi Joseph - sounds like some cool work.

Is this based on the EIGRP implementation we currently have, or is this
implemented from scratch?

>Are there any defects in the 5.0 implementation of BFD that I should be
aware of and/or backport BFD fixes from 7.2?

Rafael is likely the best person to answer that in specifics, but seeing as
there's well over 7000 commits to FRR since 5.0, at least 224 of which are
in BFD, the answer is almost certainly yes.
Any particular reason you chose to stay based on the 5.0 branch?

>Is there any interest in including EIGRP in the full FRR feature set?

Yes, but we have an existing EIGRP implementation that is currently being
worked on by others. Unfortunately, this development practice of creating
whole features in private and then publishing them all at once has, time
and again, proved very difficult to support for a collaborative free
software project that moves as fast as we do :(. In any case we'd certainly
be interested in the code to see what can be done.

P.s. I suggest you join our public slack if you'd be interested in chatting
with the other folks working on EIGRP in FRR.
https://frrouting.org/#participate

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:46 AM FREIVALD, JOSEPH A <jf1578 at att.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> The last couple years I have been working on a side project to implement a
> fully functional and tested version of EIGRP based on FRR release 5.0. That
> work is largely complete and I would like to share with the community but
> it will likely require significant grooming to match the coding style
> requirements and stage the multiple merge requests required integrate it
> with the dev code-base. Unfortunately I don’t have time to do that.
>
>
>
> This implementation behaves very well in complex Cisco-based networks with
> only one ‘on-the-wire’ deviation from Cisco’s behavior (sending individual
> REPLY messages for each prefix in a bulk QUERY instead of bundling them,
> which only results in slightly more traffic and processor usage and doesn’t
> affect network the topology). The latest version includes clean
> Stuck-in-active behavior as well. Current work is adding BFD to EIGRP using
> the 5.0 OSPF BFD implementation as a pony.
>
>
>
> I have two questions:
>
>
>
>    1. Are there any defects in the 5.0 implementation of BFD that I
>    should be aware of and/or backport BFD fixes from 7.2?
>    2. Is there any interest in including EIGRP in the full FRR feature
>    set?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> *Joseph A. T. Freivald*
>
> Core Technical Architect
>
> Global Business - Public Sector Solutions
>
>
>
> *AT&T*
>
> 3033 Chain Bridge Road, Oakton, VA 22124-2542
> m  703.853.7272 | jf1578 at att.com
>
>
>
> MOBILIZING *YOUR* WORLD
>
>
>
> *"This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are AT&T property, are
> confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom this email is addressed. If you are not one of the named
> recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received
> this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this message
> immediately from your computer. Any other uses, retention, dissemination,
> forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited."*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200612/c994ca9f/attachment.htm>


More information about the dev mailing list