Hi Thomas, no, randomly adding host-routes to peers addresses is an unwanted behavour imo. The more important question is: why are you using a /32 transit network? Your OS will add a route to your peer when using /31 or less. Am 10.10.2014 12:05 schrieb "Thomas Goldberg" <t.goldberg77@gmail.com>:
Hello,
we've OSPF running over a openvpn ptp tunnel and some problems with the routes injected by bird (v1.4.5).
OSPF is running in PtP mode on the tun0 interface of each router. The problem is that bird doesn't inject any routers for the local interface IP as intra-area route into OSPF itself. We've to inject them as external route via import of routes learned by a direct protocol (d_local). This is how the end result looks:
Router A: interface config: 17: tun0: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 100 link/none inet 10.176.3.29 peer 10.176.3.30/32 scope global tun0
bird routes: 10.176.3.30/32 dev tun0 [d_local 2014-10-07 16:13:46] * (240) 10.176.3.29/32 via 10.176.3.30 on tun0 [o_internal 2014-10-09 17:45:44] * E1 (150/100) [10.176.3.30]
Router B: interface config: 13: tun0: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN group default qlen 100 link/none inet 10.176.3.30 peer 10.176.3.29/32 scope global tun0
bird routes: 10.176.3.29/32 dev tun0 [d_local 2014-10-09 17:45:43] * (240) 10.176.3.30/32 via 10.176.3.29 on tun0 [o_internal 2014-10-09 17:40:51] * E1 (150/100) [10.176.3.29]
Shouldn't bird inject routes like this on the corresponding router (without having to learn them via the direct protocol)? 10.176.3.29/32 dev lo [o_internal 2014-10-09 00:00:00] * I (150/0) [10.176.3.29]