- Bird-users - Mailing Lists

OSPF LSA id collision
by Eugene M. Zheganin 10 Dec '15

10 Dec '15

Hi. I have lots of messages in one of my bird's logfile: Dec 10 18:20:50 wizard bird: ospfv4: LSA ID collision for 172.16.1.194/31 They are about different LSA id. What do they mean exactly ? Does it mean some of my routers have identical networks configured ? Thanks. Eugene.

1 0

OSPF, missing external network prefix
by Eugene M. Zheganin 10 Dec '15

10 Dec '15

Hi. I have a bunch of bird routers. Recently I discovered that at least one prefix from LSADB isn't installed in FIB: (first here's what bird thinks about it) # birdc BIRD 1.4.4 ready. bird> show ospf lsadb lsid 192.168.114.192 Global Type LS ID Router Age Sequence Checksum 0005 192.168.114.192 192.168.0.15 498 80000385 d906 bird> show route for 192.168.114.193 0.0.0.0/0 via 178.161.152.73 on vlan600 [bgpv4sat 2015-12-04] * (100) [AS16285i] bird> show route for 192.168.114.192/26 0.0.0.0/0 via 178.161.152.73 on vlan600 [bgpv4sat 2015-12-04] * (100) [AS16285i] (and the actual FIB) # route -n get 192.168.114.193 route to: 192.168.114.193 destination: 0.0.0.0 mask: 0.0.0.0 gateway: 178.161.152.73 fib: 0 interface: vlan600 flags: <UP,GATEWAY,DONE,PROTO1> recvpipe sendpipe ssthresh rtt,msec mtu weight expire 0 0 0 0 1500 1 0 [root@crystal-alpha:local/etc]# route -n get 192.168.114.192/26 route: writing to routing socket: No such process I really want to inverstigate why. So far I have import ACL in bird, but this prefix doesn't seem to match: protocol ospf ospfv4 { rfc1583compat yes; export filter exportospfv4; import filter importospfv4; area 0.0.0.44 { interface "vlan1"; interface "gre0"; interface "gre1" { cost 15111; }; }; } filter importospfv4 { if net ~ [ 172.16.0.0/31, 172.16.1.80/31, 172.16.1.81/32, 172.16.1.80/32, 172.16.0.0/32, 172.16.0.1/32 ] then { print "ospfv4 import: net rejected: ", net; reject; } if net = 0.0.0.0/0 then { print "ospfv4 import: net rejected: ", net; reject; } else { print "ospfv4 import: net accepted: ", net; accept; } } Anyway, there's no signs of this missing prefix in logs. I've also noticed one more thing, may be important: this prefix is originating from a branch office. It's present and installed on all othe area 0 routers, no matter what vendor they're from, but is missing on the routers which aren't from area 0, but only if they're bird. It's present on Cisco ones (may be a coincident though, since I doesn't have any Cisco device connected with area 0 via bird). Thanks. Eugene.

2 8

Bird linux "proto bird" field
by Aviolat Romain 09 Dec '15

09 Dec '15

Dear bird gurus: I've got Bird 1.5 compiled on an Arista 7150S24 multi-layer switch platform. I'm trying to inject a route learned by BGP into the kernel routing table and then into the switch FIB. I've got the following export filter configured: protocol kernel { persist; scan time 20; seconds import none; export filter bgp_xxx_in; } If I do an #ip route, I can see my entry into the switch routing table xxx.xxx.xxx.0/22 via xxx.xxx.xxx.1 dev vlan201 proto bird >From the Arista Linux bash shell, this route is correctly used if I source a packet from here. But this route is not installed into the switch FIB. It looks like Arista only inject routes that are tagged as "proto kernel" or "proto static" from the RIB to the FIB and this one is tagged "proto bird". I've seen some interesting options in the manual like "int krt_source" but it's a read-only variable. Is there another way to achieve that ? Thanks for your help, Romain Romain Aviolat Senior System Administrator R&D and Ops Infrastructure Kudelski Security - Kudelski Group Rte de Genève 22-24, 1033 Cheseaux SWITZERLAND +41 21 732 03 79

2 2

ospf: Socket error on ix0: Permission denied + a lot KIF: Received address message for unknown interface
by SC SCx 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

Hello. I have a FreeBSD x64 10.2-p7 system with Bird 1.5.0 acting as a PPPOE concentrator using MPD5 version 5.7 The system has 2 physical interfaces: ix0 ( a /30 connection to another freebsd router - ABR running Bird ) ix1 ( listening for PPPOE via MPD5 ) And many virtual interfaces when a PPPOE connection is established that follow this pattern: ng1, ng2, ng3 ... etc Here's my bird config (This router is running in a Totally Stubby Area 0.0.0.1): router id 172.16.116.5; protocol kernel { export all; } protocol direct { interface "ix0", "ng*"; } protocol device { scan time 10; } protocol static { } protocol ospf { tick 2; area 0.0.0.1 { stub yes; summary no; networks { 10.10.0.0/16; 125.40.44.0/22; }; interface "ix0" { dead count 4; type broadcast; }; interface "ng*" { stub yes; }; }; } This router also has a firewall enabled (ipfw) with the following rules: 00100 deny ip from any to not 125.40.44.0/22 out recv ng* xmit ng* 01000 pipe tablearg ip from any to table(2) out via ng* 01010 deny ip from any to any out via ng* 01020 pipe tablearg ip from table(1) to any in via ng* 01030 deny ip from any to any in via ng* 65534 allow ip from any to any 65535 deny ip from any to any What happens when I turn the system on and receive about 800 connections (e.g around 800 ng interfaces are created) is this in the logs: Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: ospf1: Socket error on ix0: Permission denied Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 124 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 123 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 125 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 126 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 127 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 128 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 130 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 129 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 131 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 133 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 132 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 134 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 136 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 bird: KIF: Received address message for unknown interface 135 Dec 2 03:59:41 pppoe1 last message repeated 2 times .... and much more As it can be seen I see tons of KIF: Received address message for unknown interface messages which I am not sure if it means anything serious. These happen anytime a ng interface is brought up/down. The worst is ospf1: Socket error on ix0: Permission denied because bird doesn't appear to listen and form any adjacency via ospf on this interface. At first I thought this may be due to a race condition, e.g Bird might load faster than the firewall rules and with ipfw the only loaded rule at startup is 'deny ip from any to any' which could explain the permission error. However if I manually stop bird and restart it after the system has fully booted I still receive the permission error, despite that there's now an 'allow ip from any to any' rule present. Interestingly I have an identical setup created with VirtualBox for this router and when I test with only 2 PPPOE connections it doesn't complain about any permission error. Same firewall rules and everything else. System starts up the same way, but no permission error. And the router forms adjacency.. I do still see of KIF: Received address message for unknown interface messages, though. Any ideas what can be the cause? Thank you.

2 1

Re: KRT: Received route with strange next-hop
by Brian Rak 05 Dec '15

05 Dec '15

On 12/5/2015 9:54 AM, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 04:16:54PM -0500, Brian Rak wrote: >>> Sorry for late answer, 'device route' i call a route for directly >>> attached network prefix, with associated iface but without associated >>> gateway IP. Perhaps there is a better / more established term for such >>> routes. >>> >> Sorry, my spam filter was delaying this. >> >> That's what I have I think? I have the '45.63.4.188 dev veth0 scope link' >> route, I'm not aware of any other way to add this (and it doesn't use a >> gateway IP). > > Well, the recommended way is to add ptp address: > > ip addr add A.B.C.D peer 45.63.4.188 dev veth0 > > instead of just the route (when ptp address is added, the route is also > added by the kernel) > The host end of the interface does not have an IP address, so using 'ip addr add' won't really work. A peer address won't really work, this isn't a /30 (the 45.63.4.188 IP is assigned to a virtual machine, and is part of a bigger /23, we're using proxy ARP to get traffic to/from the VM).

1 0

OSPF export filter
by Anton Kiryushkin 05 Dec '15

05 Dec '15

Hello. I trying to use bird for export ospf route for Cisco Nexus with next config: router id 10.34.23.1; filter export_OSPF { if net = 77.71.22.23/32 then { ospf_metric1 = 20; ospf_metric2 = 20; print "net accepted:", net; accept; } if net = 77.71.22.24/32 then { ospf_metric1 = 10; ospf_metric2 = 10; print "net accepted:", net; accept; } reject; } protocol ospf server1 { export filter export_OSPF; #debug all; rfc1583compat yes; tick 2; area 0.0.0.0 { stub no; interface "bond0" { dead 10; neighbors { 10.0.16.1; }; type pointopoint; authentication none; }; interface "lo*" { stub yes; cost 10; priority 200; }; interface "dummy0" { stub yes; cost 15; priority 100; }; }; } But in birdc I didn't see any metrics. I have two server with same config and same addresses on interfaces lo and dummy0 with different priorities. Could you help me with export filter? -- Best regards, Anton Kiryushkin

3 6

Issue injecting network overlapping BGP next hop in bird6.
by João Taveira Araújo 05 Dec '15

05 Dec '15

Hi, I'm running into a difference in behaviour between bird and bird6, although admittedly it may come from netlink itself. I'm using bird 1.5.0, but have also tried with build from latest git head. Assume a connection to an upstream router over a link addressed with 10.0.0.0/31 or AAAA::0/127 for IPv4 and IPv6 respectively. For IPv4, the upstream announces the follow prefix: 10.0.0.0/31 via 10.0.0.0 on eth0 [session 22:14:01] ! (100) BGP.next_hop: 10.0.0.0 In this case the route fails to be injected into the FIB, because a route already exists from proto kernel, as the interface is addressed from that prefix. In IPv6, the same thing happens, but on restarting bird6 all routes fail to get injected, each with the following error: "Netlink: No route to host". If I filter out the route on clean boot, thereby avoiding every attempting to inject the overlapping route, this does not happen. Cheers, Joao

2 1

KRT: Received route with strange next-hop
by Brian Rak 05 Dec '15

05 Dec '15

I'm trying to figure out why BIRD is throwing this error every time it scans the kernel routing table: <ERR> KRT: Received route 216.155.132.254/32 with strange next-hop 45.63.4.188 <WARN> Netlink: File exists I have two routes relevant to this one: # ip route | grep 45.63.4.188 45.63.4.188 dev veth0 scope link 216.155.132.254 via 45.63.4.188 dev veth0 proto bird The 45.63.4.188 route was added by me (manually), the 216.155.132.254 was added via BIRD (BIRD learned it via BGP). So, to me this looks like bird adding the route to the kernel, then getting confused why the route exists. Aside from this warning, everything appears to be working fine. Linux routes the traffic properly, BIRD readvertises this route properly. Any thoughts here? I think I can probably suppress this warning by removing the 'ng->scope == SCOPE_HOST' check from netlink.c, but I'm not entirely sure why that's there to begin with.

2 5

need some help with filters
by D.Wesołowski 05 Dec '15

05 Dec '15

Hi, I made bird.conf based on examples http://wklej.org/id/1862384/ import: ARPNET - full BGP table EPIX - IX openpeerint EP_GLOBAL - full BGP table export: ARPNET full BGP table EPIX - only statc_bgp, ARPNET prefix EP_GLOBAL - only static, bgp, ARPNET prefix I want to export to other bgp session prefix from ARPNET only when path is direct function rt_export() { if proto = "static_bgp" then return true; if source != RTS_BGP then return false; if net_martian() then return false; if bgp_path.len > 64 then return false; #return bgp_next_hop ~ [ 193.151.48.18 ]; return (bgp_path.first ~ [ 51931, 51944 ]); #if bgp_path.first ~ [ 51931, 51944 ] then return true; } the last two line don't works. I'm looking for some hint to make it work as I want ;) TIA -- D.Wesolowski

2 1

help
by Rohrmann Sascha 03 Dec '15

03 Dec '15

1 0