- Bird-users - Mailing Lists

local address as next-hop
by Alexander Demenshin 15 Apr '18

15 Apr '18

Hi, When next-hop specified as a local address, bird 2 produces a warning like: 2018-04-15 18:34:31.136 <WARN> Next hop address 192.168.100.100 is a local address of iface routers and the route itself is installed as "unreachable". Is there any reason for this? It is completely legal under linux, according to iproute2 documentation: via ADDRESS the address of the nexthop router. Actually, the sense of this field depends on the route type. For normal unicast routes it is either the true next hop router or, if it is a direct route installed in BSD compatibility mode, it can be a local address of the interface. For NAT routes it is the first address of the block of translated IP destinations. -- With best regards, Alexander.

1 0

bird 2.0.2 does not propagate krt_metric set in static routes when exporting to kernel (and couple other small issues in static protocol)
by Alexander Demenshin 15 Apr '18

15 Apr '18

Hi, Looks like setting of krt_metric in bird 2.0.2 does not work like in bird 1.6. Construction like: protocol static static4 { route 0.0.0.0/0 via 1.1.1.1 { krt_metric = 10000; }; } is accepted, I see the route exported to the kernel, but with default bird metric 32. Yes, I know that bird can find the best route and install only that one, but I prefer to keep several static routes installed with different metrics, when bird is used only to keep them alive. Another issue, when setting via scope using "%" notation, like: route 1.2.3.0/24 via 1.1.1.1 % ifname onlink on; if "ifname" contains characters like "-" or ".", it will be rejected (syntax error), while such names are perfectly legal (at least in linux). May be it makes sense to allow quoted (TEXT instead of SYM) interface name for such cases (I tried to extend grammar and it works perfectly - fix is trivial so there is no patch attached). Small annoyance, though not an issue - "route" only accepts CIDR notation, though it would be nice to omit "/32" for single IPs, as it looks more "natural". Finally - looks like bird 2 docs is a bit incorrect - static route options must be followed by ';' as a terminator (according to grammar), while documentation lists them without, which produces "syntax error" without any details. BTW, "onlink" is not documented at all, though I was really happy to find it :) PS: As this is my first experience with bird v2 - many thanks - it is much better :) -- With best regards, Alexander.

2 2

manipulating the best path, eBGP, MED?
by Thomas＠PhaseHosting 14 Apr '18

14 Apr '18

Supp, I implemented bird in our Private cloud running proxmox to distribute our public address with eBGP to our serverhost. Through iBGP and a ucarp interface i have a HA gateway, the problem is that our host receives the routes but there are multiple entry points to our subnet ( the proxmox hosts). This makes that a diffrent in & out route doenst work. through following link: https://supportforums.cisco.com/document/126691/understanding-bgp-best-path… I learned that my hosts selects its route based on age ( the bird with the first connection is chosen). Can i send a multi-exit discriminator with my eBGP connection to my host? I googled but could find 2 answers that did't change anything: # your default gateway IP below here protocol bgp eBGP { import none; export where proto = "static_packet"; local as 65000; neighbor 10.80.x.x as 65530; password "SECRET"; #med metric 10; #default bgp_med 10; } (offcourse i tried both without # and waited till export) Or is there an other way to make sure that our host routes always to the first server and so on. -- Thomas Valgaeren thomas(a)phasehosting.io +32477915307

6 8

OSPF passive interface
by Charles Butera 12 Apr '18

12 Apr '18

Hello, I am having trouble advertising my loopback interface into ospf as passive. root@nms001] # birdc BIRD 1.6.3 ready. bird> show route 10.192.111.0/24 dev bond0 [direct1 2018-03-05] * (240) 10.250.0.0/32 dev lo [direct1 2018-03-26] * (240) I am currently advertising the route into the ospf domain using a filter as a workaround but this advertises as an External route (Type 5 LSA). I was wondering if there is a way to advertise the interface route as a Type1 LSA. Output from OSPF router in the same Area0 user@host> show ospf database OSPF database, Area 0.0.0.0 Type ID Adv Rtr Seq Age Opt Cksum Len Router 10.192.1.61 10.192.1.61 0x80001d93 1028 0x22 0x4d67 96 Router 10.192.1.62 10.192.1.62 0x80001d90 2565 0x22 0xb3f7 96 Router 10.192.1.63 10.192.1.63 0x80001d8e 2537 0x22 0x1889 96 Router 10.192.1.64 10.192.1.64 0x80001d76 2558 0x22 0xa805 96 Router 10.192.1.65 10.192.1.65 0x80001d74 2568 0x22 0xd96 96 Router 10.192.1.66 10.192.1.66 0x80001d7b 524 0x22 0x5f31 96 Router *10.192.1.67 10.192.1.67 0x8000167c 2942 0x22 0xae29 444 Router 10.192.1.68 10.192.1.68 0x80001671 2947 0x22 0x9523 420 Router 10.192.1.69 10.192.1.69 0x80001d7c 2559 0x22 0x9cde 96 Router 10.192.1.70 10.192.1.70 0x80001981 2567 0x22 0xfe6f 96 Router 10.192.1.71 10.192.1.71 0x8000198b 658 0x22 0x8f8d 96 Router 10.192.1.72 10.192.1.72 0x80001984 174 0x22 0xb999 96 Router 10.192.1.73 10.192.1.73 0x80001995 2567 0x22 0xf73e 96 Router 10.192.1.74 10.192.1.74 0x80001d7b 2559 0x22 0x80bf 96 Router 10.192.1.75 10.192.1.75 0x800013a7 1196 0x22 0xa66b 96 Router 10.192.1.76 10.192.1.76 0x800013a3 1342 0x22 0xffa 96 Router 10.192.1.77 10.192.1.77 0x80000060 839 0x22 0x3e09 72 Router 10.192.1.81 10.192.1.81 0x8000003e 55 0x22 0xf6a4 84 Router 10.192.1.82 10.192.1.82 0x8000003d 2943 0x22 0x147d 84 Router 10.192.111.11 10.192.111.11 0x8000072f 493 0x2 0x8e79 36 Network 10.192.111.1 10.192.1.71 0x8000044a 658 0x22 0x67de 32 OSPF AS SCOPE link state database Type ID Adv Rtr Seq Age Opt Cksum Len Extern *0.0.0.0 10.192.1.67 0x800015a3 1463 0x22 0x816a 36 Extern 0.0.0.0 10.192.1.68 0x8000120d 1465 0x22 0xb1d2 36 Extern 10.250.0.0 10.192.111.11 0x80000338 663 0x2 0x779f 36 Bird configuration: root@nms001] # cat /etc/bird.conf router id 10.192.111.11; filter loopback { if net ~ 10.250.0.0/32 then accept; else reject; } protocol direct { interface "bond0", "lo*"; # Restrict network interfaces it works with } protocol kernel { learn; # Learn all alien routes from the kernel persist; # Don't remove routes on bird shutdown scan time 20; # Scan kernel routing table every 20 seconds import none; # Default is import all export all; # Default is export none } protocol device { scan time 10; # Scan interfaces every 10 seconds } ############ ### OSPF ### ############ protocol ospf MyOSPF { tick 2; import none; export filter loopback; area 0.0.0.0 { stub no; interface "bond0" { hello 10; retransmit 6; cost 10; transmit delay 5; dead count 4; wait 50; type broadcast; }; }; } root@nms001] # birdc BIRD 1.6.3 ready. bird> show route 10.192.111.0/24 dev bond0 [direct1 2018-03-05] * (240) 10.250.0.0/32 dev lo [direct1 2018-03-26] * (240)

2 1

Unix virtual interfaces
by RICCARDO RUSSO 12 Apr '18

12 Apr '18

Hello, I'm running bird 2.0.2 on centOS I've configured 2 virtual interfaces (eth1:1 and lo:1) When I run show protocol I don't see them. Are virtual interfaces supported by bird? I need it in order to advertise by BGP lo:1 R --------------------------------------- # ifconfig eth0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet 163.162.230.198 netmask 255.255.255.240 broadcast 163.162.230.207 inet6 fe80::2e:a6ff:fe66:5a27 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link> ether 02:2e:a6:66:5a:27 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) RX packets 14271 bytes 996507 (973.1 KiB) RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0 TX packets 2746 bytes 314846 (307.4 KiB) TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 eth1: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet 192.168.200.8 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.200.255 inet6 fe80::9034:56ff:feee:eeee prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link> ether 92:34:56:ee:ee:ee txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) RX packets 16109 bytes 1066648 (1.0 MiB) RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0 TX packets 7805 bytes 514801 (502.7 KiB) TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 eth1:1: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet 10.10.10.10 netmask 255.255.255.255 broadcast 10.255.255.255 ether 92:34:56:ee:ee:ee txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING> mtu 65536 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 255.0.0.0 inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10<host> loop txqueuelen 1 (Local Loopback) RX packets 6 bytes 416 (416.0 B) RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0 TX packets 6 bytes 416 (416.0 B) TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 lo:1: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING> mtu 65536 inet 163.162.35.89 netmask 255.255.255.255 loop txqueuelen 1 (Local Loopback) --------------------------------------- # birdc show interfaces BIRD 2.0.2 ready. lo up (index=1) MultiAccess AdminUp LinkUp Loopback Ignored MTU=65536 127.0.0.1/8 (Preferred, scope host) 163.162.35.89/32 (scope univ) ::1/128 (Preferred, scope host) eth0 up (index=2) MultiAccess Broadcast Multicast AdminUp LinkUp MTU=1500 163.162.230.198/28 (Preferred, scope univ) fe80::2e:a6ff:fe66:5a27/64 (Preferred, scope link) eth1 up (index=3) MultiAccess Broadcast Multicast AdminUp LinkUp MTU=1500 192.168.200.8/24 (Preferred, scope site) 10.10.10.10/32 (scope site) fe80::9034:56ff:feee:eeee/64 (Preferred, scope link) Rr

2 1

Auto-summary in BGP
by Maryam Barshan 12 Apr '18

12 Apr '18

Hi, I have a question about the auto-summary option in BGP routing protocol. May I ask how I can configure it? Many thanks in advance. Regards, Maryam Secure your future - Meet Newtec Dialog(r)<http://www.newtec.eu/product/newtec-dialog>, the platform that embraces change - with award-winning Mx-DMA(r)<http://www.newtec.eu/technology/mx-dma>! ***mail confidentiality footer *** This message and any attachments thereto are confidential. They may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your system; you may not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore is in no way liable for any errors or omissions in the content of this message, which may arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy.

2 1

Am I missing the announcements for New releases or ???
by James W. Laferriere 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Hello All , Am I missing the announcements for New releases or are they ONLY on the webpage ? I really use email except for general reasearch and was hoping that the announcements of new releases would be announced here . Hope I am missing something obvious . Tia , JimL -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network&System Engineer | 3237 Holden Road | Give me Linux | | babydr(a)baby-dragons.com | Fairbanks, AK. 99709 | only on AXP | +------------------------------------------------------------------+

3 2

BGP import route
by RICCARDO RUSSO 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Hello, I'm not able to import route from BGP (CentOS 7). In log file I read "Got UPDATE" but "import updates" is always 0. With TCPDUMP I see that BGP receive the routes Rr ------------------------------------------------------------ # more bird.conf log syslog all; log stderr all; log "/var/log/bird.logg" all; debug protocols all; protocol kernel { persist; # Don't remove routes on bird shutdown scan time 20; # Scan kernel routing table every 20 seconds } protocol device { scan time 10; # Scan interfaces every 10 seconds } router id 192.168.200.6; protocol bgp bgp1 { local as 64521; neighbor 192.168.200.1 as 64520; import filter all; } ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ # tail -f /var/log/bird.logg 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1 < interface lo goes up 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1 < interface eth0 goes up 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1 < interface eth1 goes up 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1: State changed to up 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> bgp1: Started 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> bgp1: Connect delayed by 5 seconds 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1: Scanning routing table 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1: 0.0.0.0/0: [alien] ignored 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1: 192.168.44.0/24: [alien] ignored 2018-04-11 17:46:53 <TRACE> kernel1: Pruning table master 2018-04-11 17:46:57 <TRACE> bgp1: Connecting to 192.168.200.1 from local address 192.168.200.6 2018-04-11 17:46:57 <TRACE> bgp1: Connected 2018-04-11 17:46:57 <TRACE> bgp1: Sending OPEN(ver=4,as=64521,hold=240,id=c0a8c806) 2018-04-11 17:46:57 <TRACE> bgp1: Connection closed 2018-04-11 17:46:57 <TRACE> bgp1: Connect delayed by 5 seconds 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> device1: Scanning interfaces 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Connecting to 192.168.200.1 from local address 192.168.200.6 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Connected 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Sending OPEN(ver=4,as=64521,hold=240,id=c0a8c806) 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got OPEN(as=64520,hold=90,id=a3a2e686) 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Sending KEEPALIVE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got KEEPALIVE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: BGP session established 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Connected to table master 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: State changed to feed 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: State changed to up 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Sending End-of-RIB 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got UPDATE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got UPDATE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got UPDATE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got UPDATE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> bgp1: Got UPDATE 2018-04-11 17:47:03 <TRACE> ... ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ # birdc show protocols all bgp1 BIRD 1.4.5 ready. name proto table state since info bgp1 BGP master up 17:47:03 Established Preference: 100 Input filter: ACCEPT Output filter: REJECT Routes: 0 imported, 0 exported, 0 preferred Route change stats: received rejected filtered ignored accepted Import updates: 0 0 0 0 0 Import withdraws: 0 0 --- 0 0 Export updates: 0 0 0 --- 0 Export withdraws: 0 --- --- --- 0 BGP state: Established Neighbor address: 192.168.200.1 Neighbor AS: 64520 Neighbor ID: 163.162.230.134 Neighbor caps: restart-aware Session: external Source address: 192.168.200.6 Hold timer: 62/90 Keepalive timer: 22/30 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ # tcpdump -i eth1 tcp port 179 -vvv -XX 17:37:51.260061 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 49246, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 1353) 192.168.200.1.bgp > vm-1.59873: Flags [P.], cksum 0xad25 (correct), seq 61:1362, ack 69, win 210, options [nop,nop,TS val 1643220008 ecr 25496328], length 1301: BGP Update Message (2), length: 66 Origin (1), length: 1, Flags [T]: Incomplete 0x0000: 02 Next Hop (3), length: 4, Flags [T]: 192.168.200.1 0x0000: c0a8 c801 Multi Exit Discriminator (4), length: 4, Flags [O]: 100 0x0000: 0000 0064 AS Path (2), length: 4, Flags [T]: 64520 0x0000: 0201 fc08 Multi-Protocol Reach NLRI (14), length: 14, Flags [OE]: AFI: IPv4 (1), SAFI: Unicast (1) nexthop: 192.168.200.1, nh-length: 4, no SNPA 163.162.230.199/32 0x0000: 0001 0104 c0a8 c801 0020 a3a2 e6c7 ....

2 2

RPKI / roa_check() question - BIRD 2.0.2
by Radu Anghel 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Hello, I have found this while doing RPKI validation: net = 94.127.104.0/21 bgp_path = 48112 6830 174 13110 {30884 65004 65005} BGP.aggregator: 10.253.27.1 AS13110 (don't know how to read this from a var) roa_check(rpki4, net, bgp_path.last) returns ROA_INVALID because BIRD thinks bgp_path.last = 0 There is a valid ROA for 94.127.104.0/21 and AS13110, so I guess the validation should be done on the aggregator AS. Could you tell me what is the corect way to handle this? TIA, Radu

3 3

Receive/export route limit behaviour?
by Guillaume LUCAS 08 Apr '18

08 Apr '18

Hellow, On my BIRD router, I have two IPv4 BGP upstream neighbors. From them, my router receive 678,000 and 681,000 routes. On these BGP sessions, I have configured "receive limit 700000 action block". On this same router, I have one IPv4 BGP downstream neighbor. On this one, I have configured "export where proto = "static_allocations" || proto = "bgp_upstream1" || proto = "bgp_upstream2";" and "export limit 700000 action disable". "static_allocations" always contains only one route. BIRD frequently disables downstream neighbor's BGP session because the export limit has been exceeded. I can understand this behaviour: upstream1 may distribute routes that upstream2 does not have, but I see the same behavior with "export limit 750000 action disable". However, my upstreams do not provide me more than 50,000 different routes: # birdc sh route protocol bgp_upstream1 | grep -Po "[0-9./]+(?=[ ]+via)" | sort -n > bgp_upstream1 # birdc sh route protocol bgp_upstream2 | grep -Po "[0-9./]+(?=[ ]+via)" | sort -n > bgp_upstream2 # diff -b -w -y --suppress-common-lines bgp_upstream1 bgp_upstream2 | wc -l 3503 How is it possible to export more routes than I receive? In IPv6, with the same upstream and downstram neighbors and "receive limit" set to 50,000 and "export limit" set to 50,000, I have no problem. Regards.

3 4