- Bird-users - Mailing Lists

Re: Incorrect manual next hop attribute
by Ondrej Zajicek 18 Feb '13

18 Feb '13

On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 11:15:06AM +0200, Jordan Grigorov (Neterra NMT) wrote: > Hello, > > I think our scenario does not contradicts with BGP standard (RFC 4271 > 5.1.3). > > Assuming a Bird RS with 2 interfaces: > 192.168.0.1/24 eth0 <--> BIRD <--> eth1 10.0.0.1/24 > > We would like to manually set hext hop(192.168.0.50) of certain routes > advertised to BGP neighbors in the segment 192.168.0.0/24. So you receive route from eth1, change its next hop to 192.168.0.50 and announce to eth0? BIRD checks (for single hop eBGP) whether route was received on the same iface as it is send, but that is done before export filter. Did you modify the next hop in the export filter of outgoing BGP or in the import filter of incoming BGP? Did you really modify it? (You could check that by print in export filter.) How exactly looks your filter? -- 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."

2 1

20Mbps bgp traffic
by Tapio Haapala 15 Feb '13

15 Feb '13

Hello, I just noticed that one of my routers send 20Mbps bgp traffic to another router. It starts last night after configure command. Is it possible that it is caused by wrong configuration or is it just bug? -- F-Solutions Oy Tapio Haapala PL7, 90571 Oulu GSM 0400 998371 Skype burner- IRC Burner@ircnet

3 4

filter interface in protocol device
by Alexei Gradinari 15 Feb '13

15 Feb '13

Hello, How can I filter scanning interfaces in protocol device? I'd like to have something like this protocol device { scan time 10; interface "eth*"; } I need it because my server acts as PPPoE concentrator and BGP router. I don't want bird to scan ppp* interfaces. Regards, Alexei

2 2

Bird segfault during configure command
by Dmitry Sinina 11 Feb '13

11 Feb '13

Hi. We use bird as routing daemon on our linux routers. At now we have one ospf and 7 bgp protocols in configuration. During last bgp reconfiguration ( we play with med attribute) segfault occurred. I see this in gdb: Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. #0 rem_node (n=0x7f58e2fccd80) at ../lib/lists.c:99 99 ../lib/lists.c: No such file or directory. (gdb) bt #0 rem_node (n=0x7f58e2fccd80) at ../lib/lists.c:99 #1 olock_free (r=0x7f58d9bc6140) at ../../nest/locks.c:70 #2 olock_free (r=0x7f58d9bc6140) at ../../nest/locks.c:52 #3 0x00007f58d5eed2e2 in pool_free (P=<optimized out>) at resource.c:81 #4 0x00007f58d5eed356 in rfree (res=0x7f58e210e880) at resource.c:164 #5 0x00007f58d5eb716a in proto_notify_state (p=0x7f58e3481240, ps=<optimized out>) at ../../nest/proto.c:1060 #6 0x00007f58d5ee4631 in ev_run (e=<optimized out>) at event.c:85 #7 ev_run_list (l=l@entry=0x7f58d610db30) at event.c:135 #8 0x00007f58d5ee64a8 in io_loop () at io.c:1559 #9 0x00007f58d5eb0044 in main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at main.c:744 (gdb) bt full #0 rem_node (n=0x7f58e2fccd80) at ../lib/lists.c:99 z = 0x0 x = 0x7f58e2fccd88 #1 olock_free (r=0x7f58d9bc6140) at ../../nest/locks.c:70 q = 0x7f58e2fccd40 n = 0x7f58e2fccd80 l = 0x7f58d9bc6140 #2 olock_free (r=0x7f58d9bc6140) at ../../nest/locks.c:52 l = 0x7f58d9bc6140 #3 0x00007f58d5eed2e2 in pool_free (P=<optimized out>) at resource.c:81 p = <optimized out> r = 0x7f58d9bc6140 rr = 0x7f58d8bfbe00 #4 0x00007f58d5eed356 in rfree (res=0x7f58e210e880) at resource.c:164 r = 0x7f58e210e880 #5 0x00007f58d5eb716a in proto_notify_state (p=0x7f58e3481240, ps=<optimized out>) at ../../nest/proto.c:1060 ops = <optimized out> cs = 3 #6 0x00007f58d5ee4631 in ev_run (e=<optimized out>) at event.c:85 No locals. #7 ev_run_list (l=l@entry=0x7f58d610db30) at event.c:135 e = <optimized out> n = <optimized out> tmp_list = {head = 0x7fff3673ebc8, null = 0x0, tail = 0x7fff3673ebc0} #8 0x00007f58d5ee64a8 in io_loop () at io.c:1559 rd = {fds_bits = {384, 0 <repeats 15 times>}} wr = {fds_bits = {0 <repeats 16 times>}} timo = {tv_sec = 0, tv_usec = 0} hi = <optimized out> events = <optimized out> s = <optimized out> n = <optimized out> #9 0x00007f58d5eb0044 in main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at main.c:744 use_uid = 913567152 use_gid = 0 We cant reproduce this segfault but we have coredump. BIRD version 1.3.9 from debian packages(bird_1.3.9-1_amd64.deb) -- Regards, Dmitry Sinina ONAT network engineer

2 2

BGP/OSPF router security
by James Howlett 10 Feb '13

10 Feb '13

Hello all, I have a single FreeBSD/bird router running BGP and OSPF. I have two full bgp feeds and some IXP sessions. Some of my users are subject to DDoS attacks which basicly kill my router. Is there anything I can do to make things better? I was thinking about adding a second router and having one full bgp feed per router. I was also thinking about joining BGP Blackholing project. But - the question remains - what else can I do to survive a ddos, or at least be able to react when a ddos occures? All best, Jim

4 5

OSPF: Socket error: Operation not permitted
by Przemyslaw Zoltowski 08 Feb '13

08 Feb '13

hello, i'm looking for help with ospf protocol on birdc. i'm using bird in production environment for more then 3 months. 0001 BIRD 1.3.4 ready on FreeBSD mp-r2 9.0-RELEASE-p3 FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE-p3 #0: Tue Jun 12 02:52:29 UTC 2012 amd64 i get following errors in bird.log: 08-02-2013 20:13:06 <ERR> OSPF: Socket error: Operation not permitted sessions with my neighbours are going down, and after aprox 10 minutes everything gets working without any reboot of router nor daemon. what can cause such problem ? greetings pz

2 2

Meaning of "show protocols" output
by Arnold Nipper 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

Does anyone know what "preferred" in the context of rs6-l:~> birdc show protocols all R192_y BIRD 1.3.7 ready. name proto table state since info R192_y BGP Txxxxx up 2013-01-15 11:19:19 Established Description: xxxxx Preference: 100 Input filter: (unnamed) Output filter: (unnamed) Import limit: 150000 Action: restart Routes: 14303 imported, 59164 exported, 22150 preferred means. R192_y is a BGP IPv4 neighbour. TIA, Arnold -- Arnold Nipper / nIPper consulting, Sandhausen, Germany email: arnold(a)nipper.de phone: +49 6224 5593407 2 mobile: +49 172 2650958 fax: +49 6224 5593407 9

2 3

Re: Incorrect manual next hop attribute
by Ondrej Zajicek 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:17:48AM +0200, Jordan Grigorov (Neterra NMT) wrote: > To be more specific we receive a route at a subinterface eth1.10 and > announce it to a subinterface eth1.192 with next hop 192.168.0.50. > We modify the next hop using the following function. AS65065 is the > exact peer that we would like to alter the nexthop of received prefixes. So the bgp_next_hop was changed in import filter? That would make sense. The code in BIRD works that when route is exported to single-hop eBGP, then bgp_next_hop is stripped and replaced with local IP if the route came from an different interface. Then the export filter is executed. So you could change it in the export filters and it should work (AFAIK, but i didn't test that), but it is probably less convenient. We probably should add some option to never touch the bgp_next_hop and make it default for route servers, but the current behavior is as i wrote above. -- 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

Re: Incorrect manual next hop attribute
by Jordan Grigorov (Neterra NMT) 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

To be more specific we would like to receive a route from subinterface eth1.10 and announce it to subinterface eth1.192 with next hop 192.168.0.50. We modify the next hop using the following function. AS65065 is the exact peer that we would like to alter the nexthop of received prefixes. function bgp_in(int peeras) prefix set martians; { if peeras = 65065 then { bgp_next_hop = 192.168.0.50; return true; } if is_nexthop_false() then return false; martians = [ 169.254.0.0/16+, 172.16.0.0/12+, 224.0.0.0/4+,240.0.0.0/4+, 0.0.0.0/32-, 0.0.0.0/0{25,32},0.0.0.0/0{0,7} ]; if net.ip = 0.0.0.0 then return false; if (net.len < 8) || (net.len > 24) then return false; return true; }

1 0

Incorrect manual next hop attribute
by Javor Kliachev 05 Feb '13

05 Feb '13

2 2