July 2017 - Bird-users - Mailing Lists

Multiple ASBRs: summarizing prefixes from BGP into OSPF
by Israel G. Lugo 28 Jul '17

28 Jul '17

Hello, I've got an internal Openstack deployment, currently in beta but expecting a few thousands tennants in full production. Each tennant gets at least an IPv4 prefix and an IPv6 one. They may get additional prefixes upon payment or special request. The way Openstack works is each tennant will have his own (virtual) router, with an unique IP. This router is controlled directly by Openstack and only knows static routes. Then there are a couple of BGP route servers, also controlled by Openstack, who announce the prefixes and respective nexthops. On my side, I've got a couple of ASBR, using Bird to speak BGP with Openstack's route servers and learn the routes. They forward the traffic between my backbone and the tennant routers. On the backbone side, they're speaking OSPF (also with Bird) to the rest of the infrastructure and redistributing external prefixes. Everything works. My problem is, I don't want to announce hundreds or thousands of prefixes into OSPF when we go full. I'm carving the tennants from a couple of large prefixes so I want to aggregate this at the ASBRs. But I can't just blindly add a large static sink route on my ASBRs and redistribute that to OSPF; that opens me up to the risk of dropping traffic if one of the ASBRs loses BGP with the Openstack route servers. What I need, unless someone has a better suggestion, is some way to summarize externals in OSPF, such that the summary prefix is only announced if I've got more specific routes inside it. I tried creating an NSSA and placing the prefix there as external, but it didn't help: protocol ospf backbone { import all; export filter ospf_export; ecmp yes; merge external yes; area 0.0.0.0 { stub no; interface "eth0" { /* auth stuff */ }; interface "lo" { stub; }; }; area 0.0.1.2 { nssa; /* transit VLAN to the tennant routers */ interface "eth0.22" { stub; check link yes; }; external { 198.18.0.0/15; }; } >From my understanding, I believe the external keyword on an NSSA would be to aggregate in the opposite direction (backbone -> NSSA area). Is there any way to do what I want? I.e., summarize externals into OSPF, if and only if I have specific routes inside the summary prefix? That, or a conditional route, that only gets inserted if another certain route exists, or if the BGP peering is up. Regards, Israel G. Lugo

2 2

BGP multipath
by ? Barrett 28 Jul '17

28 Jul '17

Hi, how can I encode multipath next hops with BGP?

3 2

Re: IETF-99
by Ondrej Zajicek 17 Jul '17

17 Jul '17

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 05:18:03PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > 1. Ondrej, if there's so many of us, don't you need to book a table? The two of three restaurants i thought about are usually empty enough. > 2. There's the Babel working group meeting happening at 17:40 in the > Athens/Barcelona room. There are definitely no armed guards present, > we'd be glad if you guys can come. If you cannot, you can participate > over the Internet: Well, i am too shy to enter conference meeting without registration, so i at least watched that remotely. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santiago(a)crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."

1 0

IETF-99
by Clemens Schrimpe 17 Jul '17

17 Jul '17

Hi - will any of the core developers be present at IETF99 in Praha this week and if so: Where could I meet you? Thanks - Clemens IETF Meeting NOC (yes, we do use BIRD in the IETF meeting network! :-)

5 5

Static IPv6 leases on VLAN interface
by Martin Huněk 14 Jul '17

14 Jul '17

Hí, I have recently found out a problem with assigning IPv6 prefix via static protocol for the VLAN interface. When I wrote this: protocol static leases { route 2001:db8:0:100::/56 via fe80::xxxx:xxff:fexx:xxxx%eth1.3330; } It gave me: /etc/bird/leases6.conf, line 2: syntax error However, when I use a host interface for that VLAN (%eth1), it suddenly works. I've also tried to assign prefix via public address used on that interface (say 2001:db8::xxxx (/64). Even though there was no error in configuration phase, the route was ignored by bird. Is there a way how to insert static route pointing to the VLAN interface? Is the "dot" syntax supported? Has anyone had more luck using a static protocol in that manner? If it is a bug, will it be fixed in 1.6.x, or just in bird2? I've tried to do that on version 1.6.0 as well as 1.6.3, no luck in the both cases. Best regards, Martin Hunek Freenet Liberec, z.s.

2 2

re: bird redhat repo missing rpms for 1.6.3
by Logan V. 13 Jul '17

13 Jul '17

This is in reply to the issue mentioned in the thread from May[1] where folks were having problems installing BIRD 1.6.3 from the repo due to the ncurses 6 linking. I experienced the same problem recently and ended up creating a COPR repository[2] to create BIRD 1.6.3 builds that are installable on CentOS 6 and 7. If you just want a working repo to install BIRD 1.6.3 on CentOS from, you can stop reading here and go install from the linked COPR repo. For the nuts and bolts of what is published and what was needed to make this work, read further. The CentOS 6 build references the BIRD 1.6.3 published src.rpm[3], and the CentOS 7 build references the Fedora 26 src.rpm[4]. The CentOS 6 build is very straight forward, because BIRD publishes a src.rpm with an upstart init script.. COPR sources this src.rpm directly, builds it in their CI system, and publishes it to my repo[5]. Unfortunately the src.rpm that BIRD publishes does not produce a usable build on CentOS 7 due to the broken init script and lack of a systemd service unit. I have no idea if any of this has changed since 1.6.3, but as of 1.6.3, there is a line[6] which does not work using systemd's init backwards compatibility on CentOS 7, since "${NETWORKING}" and "${NETWORKING_IPV6}" are not set. I later found that Fedora publishes a BIRD src.rpm along with a systemd service unit that they use to create their builds on Fedora repos[7]. So instead of using the BIRD src.rpm to build for CentOS 7, I used the Fedora 26 src.rpm instead which includes the necessary systemd unit file to create a working CentOS 7 package[8]. For future BIRD releases, I will continue to maintain the COPR repo if necessary so my ansible-bird role[9] will continue to work on EL6/7 systems. It will be a lot more convenient to maintain the COPR if I can source EL6 and EL7 builds directly from the BIRD src.rpm, and it looks like the only roadblock for that is BIRD will need to add a systemd unit and integrate it to their spec file[10]. Logan P.S. Thanks to all of the contributors for this excellent software! [1] http://bird.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/2017-May/011235.html [2] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/logan2211/bird/ [3] http://rpm.knot-dns.cz/redhat/bird-1.6.3-1.src.rpm [4] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everythin… [5] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/logan2211/bird/build/578086/ [6] https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/blob/v1.6.3/misc/bird.init#L30 [7] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/bird.git/tree/bird.service [8] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/logan2211/bird/build/578083/ [9] https://github.com/logan2211/ansible-bird [10] https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/blob/v1.6.3/misc/bird.spec

2 1

FreeBSD, OSPF & bird 1.6.0
by Борис Коваленко 12 Jul '17

12 Jul '17

Hello! Have 2 FreeBSD hosts directly connected via VLAN. Host 1 ip: x.x.12.203 Host 2 ip: x.x.12.204 Host 1 is FreeBSD 10.3-p12, running bird 1.6.0 Host 2 is FreeBSD 11-Stable, running bird 1.6.3 The problem is that Host1 can't resolve ARP of Host2 because of this kernel route: X.X.12.204 31.44.12.204 UGH1 lagg0.150 This route is installed by bird. When I filter this route in updates - I see no problems in ARP. But where it is coming from? Imho from (show ospf state) router 0.0.1.2 distance 10 network X.X.12.200/29 metric 10 stubnet 172.31.1.2/32 metric 0 > external X.X.12.200/29 metric2 20 > external X.X.12.204/32 metric2 20 external 172.31.1.2/32 metric2 20 Configs are pretty simple and shown below. So my question is - Is this normal or something wrong with my config? common part of configs: protocol device main_device { scan time 60; } protocol direct main_direct { interface "*"; check link yes; } # # # filter f_main_kernel_import { accept; } filter f_main_kernel_export { if(source = RTS_STATIC || source = RTS_STATIC_DEVICE) then accept; else if(source = RTS_INHERIT) then accept; else if(source = RTS_OSPF || source = RTS_OSPF_IA || source = RTS_OSPF_EXT1 || source = RTS_OSPF_EXT2) then accept; else if(source = RTS_BGP) then { if(bgp_path.len < 2) then accept; else { if(defined(bgp_community) && (bgp_community ~ [(BGP_MC_LOCAL)] || bgp_community ~ [(BGP_MC_LOCAL_INTERNET)] || bgp_community ~ [(BGP_MC_CUSTOMER)])) then accept; else if(defined(bgp_ext_community) && (bgp_ext_community ~ [(BGP_EMC_LOCAL)] || bgp_ext_community ~ [(BGP_EMC_LOCAL_INTERNET)] || bgp_ext_community ~ [(BGP_EMC_CUSTOMER)])) then accept; else if(defined(bgp_community) && bgp_community ~ [(BGP_MC_UPSTREAM)] && fn_ipv4_default()) then accept; else reject; } } else reject "[f_main_kernel_export] reject: ", net, "/", from, "/", source; } # filter f_main_ospf_import { if(fn_ipv4_announced()) then { bgp_community.add(BGP_MC_LOCAL_INTERNET); bgp_ext_community.add(BGP_EMC_LOCAL_INTERNET); } else { bgp_community.add(BGP_MC_LOCAL); bgp_ext_community.add(BGP_EMC_LOCAL); } bgp_local_pref = BGP_LP_LOCAL; if(net = 31.44.12.204/32) then reject; accept; } filter f_main_ospf_export { case source { RTS_INHERIT: ospf_metric2 = 20; accept; RTS_DEVICE: ospf_metric2 = 20; accept; RTS_STATIC_DEVICE: if(fn_ipv4_default()) then ospf_metric2 = 100; else ospf_metric2 = 20; accept; RTS_STATIC: ospf_metric2 = 20; accept; RTS_BGP: if(fn_ipv4_default()) then { ospf_metric2 = 100; accept; } else reject; RTS_OSPF: accept; RTS_OSPF_IA: accept; RTS_OSPF_EXT1: accept; RTS_OSPF_EXT2: accept; else: reject "[f_main_ospf_export] reject: ", net, "/", from, "/", source; } } Host1 OSPF: root@br0:/usr/local/etc/bird# more ipv4_ospf.conf # protocol ospf main_ospf { rfc1583compat yes; tick 2; router id 0.0.1.1; export filter f_main_ospf_export; import filter f_main_ospf_import; area 0.0.0.0 { networks { 172.31.1.1/32; X.X.12.200/29; }; interface "lo*" { cost 10; hello 15; dead 60; type ptp; }; interface "lagg0.150" { cost 10; hello 2; dead 10; }; }; } Host2 OSPF: root@br0:/usr/local/etc/bird# more ipv4_ospf.conf # protocol ospf main_ospf { rfc1583compat yes; tick 2; router id 0.0.1.2; export filter f_main_ospf_export; import filter f_main_ospf_import; area 0.0.0.0 { networks { 172.31.1.2/32; X.X.12.200/29; }; interface "lo*" { cost 10; hello 15; dead 60; type ptp; }; interface "lagg0.150" { cost 10; hello 2; dead 10; }; }; } Regards, Boris -- С уважением, Борис Коваленко

2 3

UNABLE TO CONNECT BIRDC6
by Janvier Rwakagabo 11 Jul '17

11 Jul '17

Hi Can you assist me on this issue, when trying to access birdc6, I got below error #birdc6 Unable to connect to server control socket (/run/bird/bird6.ctl): Connection refused Regards, Janvier R.

2 1

BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) support in Bird?
by Baptiste Jonglez 11 Jul '17

11 Jul '17

Hi, I am wondering if somebody is working on BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) support in Bird? Note that I'm just asking, I'm not requesting our beloved Bird developers to add this feature with a deadline set to yesterday :) I might try to implement it if nobody else already did. Basically, this is just a way to export BGP data over a TCP connection: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7854 This looks like a useful alternative to dumping to mrtdump files, there are already several free software clients: https://code.google.com/archive/p/bmpreceiver/ http://www.openbmp.org/#!index.md Baptiste

3 3

Re: Next-hop check not needed?
by Vincent Bernat 04 Jul '17

04 Jul '17

❦ 28 juin 2017 14:01 +0200, Ondrej Zajicek <santiago(a)crfreenet.org> : > Note that when learning route from the kernel you could workaround it by > using 'onlink' route flag. Great! It seems to work: $ ip route show table public dev eth2 203.0.113.1 scope link metric 10 203.0.113.10 via 203.0.113.1 metric 10 onlink bird> show route table public 203.0.113.10/32 via 203.0.113.1 on eth2 [kernel_public 15:58:09] * (200) 203.0.113.1/32 dev eth2 [kernel_public 15:58:09] * (200) But BIRD (1.6.3) still seems to be a bit confused, since I got this message in a loop: 2017-06-28 16:01:20 <ERR> KRT: Received route 203.0.113.10/32 with strange next-hop 203.0.113.1 2017-06-28 16:01:20 <WARN> Netlink: File exists Other than that, everything works as expected. I don't know how to interpret the first message (is it receiving two routes?) but the second message seems to say that it tries to reinstall the same route it received. -- 10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)

2 5