- Bird-users - Mailing Lists

bird control-socket: connection reset by peer
by Oliver Herms 14 Nov '17

14 Nov '17

Hello bird users, I'm running bird 1.6.3 on ubuntu 16.04 as kind of a route server. I wrote a piece of software that connects to the bird control-socket and runs queries against it like this: "show route all for x.y.z.a protocol xxx". The software keeps the socket open and executes the queries in a loop persisting of a write() call followed by a read() call. Now to the problem: At some point bird resets the connection and the logs are not showing anything related. Did anyone make similar experiences or can help me to find out what's wrong with bird here? Thanks Oliver -- Oliver Herms oliver.peter.herms(a)gmail.com

2 2

Bird6 high CPU usage
by Saksham Manchanda 12 Nov '17

12 Nov '17

Hi All, I have a loopback IPv6 address on a server. IP addr = 2dd:1111:1111:1111:1111::1 I use BGP to announce this to the upstream router. Client traffic comes in through an interface ens3 connected to the router with destination address as the loopback. Bird configuration: protocol direct { description "Local anycast addresses"; export none; interface "lo"; } # The kernel protocol gives us access to the kernel routing table. protocol kernel { #persist; # Don't remove routes on shutdown scan time 20; # Scan kernel routing table every 20 seconds export all; # Default is export none } # The device protocol is needed in order to see what addresses are local # to this server. protocol device { scan time 10; # Scan interfaces every 10 seconds } protocol bgp { description "Arya"; import none; local as 65001; neighbor neighbourIPv6ADDR as 100; direct; # Neighbors are directly connected hold time 240; connect retry time 120; keepalive time 80; # defaults to hold time / 3 #export filter packetdns; export all; } All this works great. Now, when client traffic comes in we get the following entries in the routing table: . . . CLIENTIP::136 via 2dd:1111:1111:1111:1111::1 dev ens3 metric 0 cache CLIENTIP::5 via 2dd:1111:1111:1111:1111::1 dev ens3 metric 0 cache CLIENTIP::13 via 2dd:1111:1111:1111:1111::1 dev ens3 metric 0 cache CLIENTIP::15 via 2dd:1111:1111:1111:1111::1 dev ens3 metric 0 cache . . . This table grows to ip -6 r s |wc -l 8296 And changes constantly. Now, the top output shows bird using a lot of CPU: 2205 root 20 0 6924 780 560 R 26.2 0.0 0:06.14 bird6 Since my configuration will never make use of these entries, is there a way to disable this scanning behaviour in bird? Thanks! -- Saksham Manchanda

1 0

Issues establishing more than 2 BGP sessions
by Chris Stein 12 Nov '17

12 Nov '17

Hello there- I’m hoping to get guidance/feedback from you all on whether or not what I’m trying to do it possible, and if it is possible, what am I doing incorrectly. My goal is to make this a transit VPC for handling routes between multiple remote regions (and clouds). I’m testing with 4 VPCs (A, B, C, and D), each with a different ASN. VPC B is acting as my transit VPC, which is where bird and strongswan are running. VPCs A, C, and D are acting as the remote regions, and each has a VPN connection back to B. IPSec is up and working as expected, but routing is giving me some trouble. Each VPN has 2 tunnels, so I’m currently trying to establish 6 BGP sessions, however, only 2 sessions will establish at a time. The other sessions are in a “Start” state. Eventually, one of the established connections will drop and may reestablish, or, one of the other tunnels will establish a BGP connection. I have tried multiple bird configurations, but all roads lead back only 2 established BGP sessions. I thought this example might be what I need, but it also did not work: https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/wikis/Simple_route_server Individually, bird is able to establish a session on both tunnels at every remote VPC, so I know that works. Occasionally, I have noticed that established connections will disconnect with a “Hold timer expired”. There’s something I’m missing/overlooking in the config to allow all sessions to be active. Below is the most basic config I have used. Thanks in advance for your help. log "/var/log/bird.log" all; debug protocols all; router id 172.41.1.117; protocol kernel { scan time 10; export all; import all; } protocol device { scan time 10; } template bgp aws { local as 65000; hold time 30; export all; import all; direct; } protocol bgp ATUN0 from aws { neighbor 169.254.xxx.xxx as 7224; } protocol bgp ATUN1 from aws { neighbor 169.254.xxx.xxx as 7224; } protocol bgp CTUN0 from aws { neighbor 169.254.xxx.xxx as 65100; } protocol bgp CTUN1 from aws { neighbor 169.254.xxx.xxx as 65100; } protocol bgp DTUN0 from aws { neighbor 169.254.xxx.xxx as 65200; } protocol bgp DTUN1 from aws { neighbor 169.254.xxx.xxx as 65200; }

2 2

BGP with wrong netmask on wan interface
by Magnus Löfqvist 09 Nov '17

09 Nov '17

Hi, I have some mobile routers (connected over LTE) and with openvpn. Over the openvpn we are running a BGP to allow distribute some routes and export routes. Some of the routers are having wrong netmask (255.0.0.0 instead of 255.255.255.252). This seems to work (ie internet are working, and the openvpn connection is established). But when we are trying to get the BGP connection up, it tries to send the BGP connection over the WAN istead of openvpn connection. I guess that I have made some mistake in the config. It should take smaller path before matching the larger.. WAN (Mobile): 10.6.90.187 / 255.0.0.0 OpenVPN interface (tap0): 10.9.140.33 / 255.255.252.0 Bird config: template bgp RR_LTE { debug all; # debug BGP description "BIRD RR"; local as 1; # the AS used by the local BGP speaker direct; gateway direct; import filter import_ATM; # just accept everything export filter export_ATM; # and advertise it to all the neigbors connect retry time 10; # reconnect try after 10s hold time 240; # hold time send in BGP messages } protocol bgp BGP1 from RR_LTE { neighbor 10.9.140.1 as 1; preference 140;}; root@client1:/etc# tcpdump -ni wwan0 tcp port 179 and host 10.9.140.1 tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on wwan0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 15:29:08.755188 IP 10.6.90.187.34974 > 10.9.140.1.179: Flags [S], seq 1482209106, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 88007 ecr 0,nop,wscale 8], length 0 15:29:11.762726 IP 10.6.90.187.45591 > 10.9.140.1.179: Flags [S], seq 1681977930, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 88307 ecr 0,nop,wscale 8], length 0 Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards Magnus Löfqvist

2 9

Fwd: about the bgp route reflector problem?
by 曾小小 03 Nov '17

03 Nov '17

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: 曾小小 <flyinsky2018(a)gmail.com> Date: 2017-11-03 9:36 GMT+08:00 Subject: Re: about the bgp route reflector problem? To: Matthew Walster <matthew(a)walster.org> Sorry for the description of some problems. Thank you for your answer, thank you very much！！😊 I want to know the route (ebgp) of R3, after entering route reflector (R1), the route obtained on R2 (for example, 120.26.0.0/18, 122.72.90.78/32 route entry) did not add BGP.originator_id and BGP. cluster_list routing attributes? Did you mean that route reflectors do not add route attributes (BGP.originator_id and BGP. Cluster_list) to routes originating from ebgp? 2017-11-03 1:47 GMT+08:00 Matthew Walster <matthew(a)walster.org>: > Maybe I'm missing something here, but in the examples you show, > 120.26.0.0/18 and 122.72.90.78/32 have not been reflected? Route > Reflection deals with iBGP only -- eBGP to iBGP does not need a route > reflector. Only the attributes learned on the iBGP session from R4 will be > reflected (and have the originator and cluster attributes set) to R1. > > Does that make sense? > > Matthew Walster > > On 2 November 2017 at 11:30, 曾小小 <flyinsky2018(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> about the bgp route reflector problem? >> Why does the reflector client receive EBGP routing entries without >> attributes?? >> >> >> my topology is shown below: >> >> R3 (as 100) >> | >> | （ebgp） >> | >> | >> | ( ibgp) >> R1 (RR)--------------------R4 (client) (as 200) >> | >> | >> | >> | ( ibgp ) >> | >> | >> R2 （client）(as 200) >> My configuration is as follows： >> >> ===The R1 (RR) configuration is as follows: >> >> #ebgp parts >> >> protocol bgp bgp_pa_r3 { >> description "ebgp-pa-r3"; >> multihop 10; >> table tab_pa_adsl; >> igp table tab_ospf_10; >> local as 200; >> neighbor 192.168.1.1 as 100; >> source address 192.168.1.2; >> import all; >> export all; >> next hop self; >> default bgp_local_pref 5; >> } >> >> #rr parts >> template bgp rr_client { >> description "ibgp-rr1"; >> local 192.168.2.1 as 200; >> multihop; >> rr client; >> rr cluster id 1.1.1.1; >> } >> >> protocol bgp bgp_pa_r2 from rr_client { >> debug all; >> enable route refresh on; >> table tab_rr_1; >> igp table tab_ospf_10; >> neighbor 192.168.2.2 as 200; >> export all; >> import all; >> } >> >> protocol bgp bgp_pa_r4 from rr_client { >> table tab_rr_1; >> igp table tab_ospf_10; >> neighbor 192.168.2.4 as 200; >> export all; >> import all; >> # next hop self; >> } >> >> ==The R2 client configuration is as follows: >> >> protocol bgp bgp_pa_r2 { >> router id 192.168.2.2; >> debug all; >> # debug { states,interfaces,events }; >> description "ibgp-rr1"; >> import all; >> export all; >> local as 200; >> neighbor 192.168.2.1 as 200; >> source address 192.168.2.2; >> next hop self; >> } >> >> ================== >> >> Check the route of R2 and find that the route entry received R4 has the >> BGP.originator_id and BGP.cluster_list attributes, >> but the entry received from R1 does not have this attribute. why? >> >> Thank you very much for your help!! thanks!! >> >> >> The route entries viewed by R2 are as follows: >> >> bird> show route protocol bgp_pa_r2 all >> 1007-121.52.236.16/32 >> 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ >> 1012- BGP.origin: IGP >> BGP.as_path: >> BGP.next_hop: 192.168.2.4 >> BGP.local_pref: 100 >> * BGP.originator_id: 192.168.2.4* >> * BGP.cluster_list: 1.1.1.1* >> 1007-116.211.98.20/32 >> 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ >> 1012- BGP.origin: IGP >> BGP.as_path: >> BGP.next_hop: 192.168.2.4 >> BGP.local_pref: 100 >> * BGP.originator_id: 192.168.2.4* >> * BGP.cluster_list: 1.1.1.1* >> 1007-120.26.0.0/18 >> 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ >> 1012- BGP.origin: IGP >> BGP.as_path: 100 >> BGP.next_hop: 192.168.1.1 >> BGP.local_pref: 5 >> >> 1007-122.72.90.78/32 >> 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ >> 1012- BGP.origin: IGP >> BGP.as_path: 100 >> BGP.next_hop: 192.168.1.1 >> BGP.local_pref: 5 >> >> >

2 1

about the bgp route reflector problem?
by 曾小小 02 Nov '17

02 Nov '17

about the bgp route reflector problem? Why does the reflector client receive EBGP routing entries without attributes?? my topology is shown below: R3 (as 100) | | （ebgp） | | | ( ibgp) R1 (RR)--------------------R4 (client) (as 200) | | | | ( ibgp ) | | R2 （client）(as 200) My configuration is as follows： ===The R1 (RR) configuration is as follows: #ebgp parts protocol bgp bgp_pa_r3 { description "ebgp-pa-r3"; multihop 10; table tab_pa_adsl; igp table tab_ospf_10; local as 200; neighbor 192.168.1.1 as 100; source address 192.168.1.2; import all; export all; next hop self; default bgp_local_pref 5; } #rr parts template bgp rr_client { description "ibgp-rr1"; local 192.168.2.1 as 200; multihop; rr client; rr cluster id 1.1.1.1; } protocol bgp bgp_pa_r2 from rr_client { debug all; enable route refresh on; table tab_rr_1; igp table tab_ospf_10; neighbor 192.168.2.2 as 200; export all; import all; } protocol bgp bgp_pa_r4 from rr_client { table tab_rr_1; igp table tab_ospf_10; neighbor 192.168.2.4 as 200; export all; import all; # next hop self; } ==The R2 client configuration is as follows: protocol bgp bgp_pa_r2 { router id 192.168.2.2; debug all; # debug { states,interfaces,events }; description "ibgp-rr1"; import all; export all; local as 200; neighbor 192.168.2.1 as 200; source address 192.168.2.2; next hop self; } ================== Check the route of R2 and find that the route entry received R4 has the BGP.originator_id and BGP.cluster_list attributes, but the entry received from R1 does not have this attribute. why? Thank you very much for your help!! thanks!! The route entries viewed by R2 are as follows: bird> show route protocol bgp_pa_r2 all 1007-121.52.236.16/32 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ 1012- BGP.origin: IGP BGP.as_path: BGP.next_hop: 192.168.2.4 BGP.local_pref: 100 * BGP.originator_id: 192.168.2.4* * BGP.cluster_list: 1.1.1.1* 1007-116.211.98.20/32 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ 1012- BGP.origin: IGP BGP.as_path: BGP.next_hop: 192.168.2.4 BGP.local_pref: 100 * BGP.originator_id: 192.168.2.4* * BGP.cluster_list: 1.1.1.1* 1007-120.26.0.0/18 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ 1012- BGP.origin: IGP BGP.as_path: 100 BGP.next_hop: 192.168.1.1 BGP.local_pref: 5 1007-122.72.90.78/32 1008- Type: BGP unicast univ 1012- BGP.origin: IGP BGP.as_path: 100 BGP.next_hop: 192.168.1.1 BGP.local_pref: 5

2 1

[PATCH] babel: Ignore Hello TLVs with unicast flag set
by Toke Høiland-Jørgensen 31 Oct '17

31 Oct '17

RFC6126bis introduces a flags field for the Hello TLV, and adds a unicast flag that is used to signify that a hello was sent as unicast. This adds parsing of the flags field and ignores such unicast hellos, which preserves compatibility until we can add a proper implementation of the unicast hello mechanism. Signed-off-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke(a)toke.dk> --- proto/babel/packets.c | 13 ++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/proto/babel/packets.c b/proto/babel/packets.c index efe05678..597ed60d 100644 --- a/proto/babel/packets.c +++ b/proto/babel/packets.c @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct babel_tlv_ack { struct babel_tlv_hello { u8 type; u8 length; - u16 reserved; + u16 flags; u16 seqno; u16 interval; } PACKED; @@ -104,8 +104,9 @@ struct babel_tlv_seqno_request { } PACKED; -#define BABEL_FLAG_DEF_PREFIX 0x80 -#define BABEL_FLAG_ROUTER_ID 0x40 +#define BABEL_FLAG_DEF_PREFIX 0x80 +#define BABEL_FLAG_ROUTER_ID 0x40 +#define BABEL_FLAG_UNICAST_HELLO 0x8000 struct babel_parse_state { @@ -340,6 +341,12 @@ babel_read_hello(struct babel_tlv *hdr, union babel_msg *m, { struct babel_tlv_hello *tlv = (void *) hdr; struct babel_msg_hello *msg = &m->hello; + u16 flags; + + /* We currently don't support unicast Hello */ + flags = get_u16(&tlv->flags); + if (flags & BABEL_FLAG_UNICAST_HELLO) + return PARSE_IGNORE; msg->type = BABEL_TLV_HELLO; msg->seqno = get_u16(&tlv->seqno); -- 2.14.2

2 2

RE: Bird redundant routers with same AS on same location and prefix delegation to lower router
by Gelderman, Richard 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Hi Andrew, As I am new to Bird I can not find a good example how to create a RR cluster with two routers R1 + R2. Do you have experience with a RR cluster with multiple routers? My biggest question is acquily how to config the sessions between R1 + R2 as clustermembers without creating a loop. Regards, Richard Van: Andrew [mailto:nitr0@seti.kr.ua] Verzonden: donderdag 7 september 2017 16:55 Aan: Gelderman, Richard <r.gelderman(a)rtvoost.nl> Onderwerp: Re: Bird redundant routers with same AS on same location and prefix delegation to lower router You may redistribute all routes between R1 and R2 using RR (both received from R3 and received from uplinks), and redistribute just default to R3 using separate table (with static default and routes peering to main table). On 07.09.2017 17:38, Gelderman, Richard wrote: Hi Adrew, I thought about this option, I don't want to pass a full BGP table towards R3. In other words R1 + R2 should be used for routing for all routes and R3 should only route net A and net B and must route through to reach other networks. Regards, Richard Van: Bird-users [mailto:bird-users-bounces@network.cz] Namens Andrew Verzonden: donderdag 7 september 2017 15:06 Aan: bird-users(a)network.cz<mailto:bird-users@network.cz> Onderwerp: Re: Bird redundant routers with same AS on same location and prefix delegation to lower router Hi. You should configure R1 and R2 as route reflectors. On 07.09.2017 14:17, Gelderman, Richard wrote: I am trying to achieve a redundant routing setup with two routers with the same ASN who do prefix delegation to a lower router. The setup is the following: AS1000 ISP1 ISP2 AS2000 | | | | AS10000 R1 ======== R2 AS10000 prefix /22 \ iBGP / prefix /22 \ / \ / \ / R3 AS65000 / \ / \ net A net B prefix /24 prefix /24 Does anybody has experience with this kind of setup? Regards, Richard

4 4

Dynamic add BGP config
by Magnus Löfqvist 20 Oct '17

20 Oct '17

Hi, It is possible to dynamic add BGP neighbors to the config when a "unknown" tries to estsblish a BGP session? We have a iBGP RR that we connect routers connected to a transport network. It should be nice that we dont need to change the configuration at the RR when we add a new router. To day I have predefined passive neighbors, but maybe it are some better way of doing this? / Magnus Sent from Nine<http://www.9folders.com/>

1 0

conf ch -> kill bird
by Mikhail Mayorov 20 Oct '17

20 Oct '17

bird ~ # birdc BIRD 1.6.3 ready. bird> configure check Reading configuration from /usr/local/etc/bird/bird.conf Configuration OK bird> configure Connection closed by server Can't catch an error in a configuration file. In testing, everything OK. But when you apply all the bad and the bird just falls. In log file I got: Oct 20 17:10:42 bird bird[19609]: Reconfiguring Oct 20 17:10:42 bird bird[19609]: Unknown instruction 8574 in same (~) After start I got: Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: Graceful restart started Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: Started Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:44 bird bird[19675]: ... Oct 20 17:10:56 bird bird[19675]: I/O loop cycle took 11494 ms for 13 events Oct 20 17:10:56 bird bird[19675]: Kernel dropped some netlink messages, will resync on next scan. Oct 20 17:10:56 bird bird[19675]: papa_ipv4: Received: Cease Oct 20 17:10:56 bird bird[19675]: Kernel dropped some netlink messages, will resync on next scan. Oct 20 17:10:56 bird bird[19675]: blockhole_rfc7999_ipv4_bgpin: set RTD_BLACKHOLE for 194.85.16.6/32 from 193.232.140.100 Oct 20 17:10:58 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:58 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:58 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:58 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:58 bird bird[19675]: filters, line 11: ~ applied on unknown type pair Oct 20 17:10:59 bird bird[19675]: ... Oct 20 17:10:59 bird bird[19675]: Kernel dropped some netlink messages, will resync on next scan. I suspect that the error in the file bird-all.functions function tier1. My configuration: BIRD.rndbird bird # cat bird.conf include "bird-all.conf"; include "bird-ipv4.functions"; include "bird-roa4.conf"; [skip] BIRD.rndbird bird # cat bird-all.functions function clear_my_comm() pair set my_comm; { my_comm = [ (49037, *) ]; bgp_community = delete( bgp_community, my_comm ); } function tier1(bgppath cp) { if cp ~ [= * 1 * =] then return true; # Level 3 Communications if cp ~ [= * 209 * =] then return true; # CenturyLink if cp ~ [= * 286 * =] then return true; # KPN International if cp ~ [= * 701 * =] then return true; # Verizon Enterprise Solutions if cp ~ [= * 702 * =] then return true; # Verizon Enterprise Solutions if cp ~ [= * 703 * =] then return true; # Verizon Enterprise Solutions if cp ~ [= * 1239 * =] then return true; # Sprint if cp ~ [= * 1299 * =] then return true; # Telia Carrier if cp ~ [= * 2828 * =] then return true; # Verizon Enterprise Solutions if cp ~ [= * 2914 * =] then return true; # NTT Communications if cp ~ [= * 3257 * =] then return true; # Global Telecom & Technology (GTT) if cp ~ [= * 3320 * =] then return true; # Deutsche Telekom AG (ICSS) if cp ~ [= * 3356 * =] then return true; # Level 3 Communications if cp ~ [= * 3549 * =] then return true; # Level 3 Communications if cp ~ [= * 3561 * =] then return true; # CenturyLink if cp ~ [= * 4436 * =] then return true; # Global Telecom & Technology (GTT) if cp ~ [= * 5511 * =] then return true; # Orange if cp ~ [= * 6453 * =] then return true; # Tata Communications (INDIA) if cp ~ [= * 6461 * =] then return true; # Zayo Group if cp ~ [= * 6762 * =] then return true; # Telecom Italia Sparkle (Seabone) if cp ~ [= * 6830 * =] then return true; # Liberty Global if cp ~ [= * 7018 * =] then return true; # AT&T if cp ~ [= * 12956 * =] then return true; # Telefonica Global Solutions return false; } function aggroute() { if tier1(bgp_path) then return true; return false; } -- Regards, Mikhail V. Majorov Megalink Company, Director of engineering 318, Chehova street, Taganrog, Russia, 347932 tel work: +7 8634 431431 (ext 101) tel mobile: +7 918 5565520 sip: 000101(a)tagan.ru www.tagan.ru

2 2