W dniu 2011-09-26 01:06, fredrik danerklint pisze:
I've made an patch for aggregate and saw this:
aggregate: [line 182241] 76.10.159.0/18 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 381089] 203.228.216.0/20 inconsistent; ignoring line
As far as I see, networks are wrongli divided in example 203.228.216.0/20. You have got mask 20 so 4 least significant bits in third octet are supposed to be 0. However, when you change 216 into binary you see 11011000. It's wrong because you have got binary 1000 in your network address in third octet and you should have 0000. Proper network with 20 bitts mask is number is 203.220.208.0/20 or 203.220.240.0/20. Others are wrong. This is the reason why your netwrok prefixes are ignored.
aggregate: [line 406205] 201.229.110.0/22 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 415017] 206.98.113.201/29 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 428289] 151.185.64.0/16 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 431088] 23.15.142.1/23 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 431090] 23.15.204.1/22 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 431092] 23.15.208.1/20 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 469114] 216.89.78.162/29 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 469115] 216.89.79.34/27 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 469116] 64.243.224.194/27 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 469117] 64.243.224.225/27 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 528731] 64.152.237.0/22 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 535250] 208.94.225.0/21 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 559385] 65.114.21.0/16 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 568772] 12.45.97.80/21 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 580238] 216.135.96.101/24 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 643219] 205.128.60.0/20 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 655639] 64.202.167.0/21 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 697189] 205.157.151.224/26 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 701126] 24.137.34.0/22 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 703347] 66.218.162.0/20 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 704137] 41.84.223.0/22 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 779954] 91.147.191.0/21 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 787647] 118.91.8.0/20 inconsistent; ignoring line aggregate: [line 823546] 46.32.96.120/21 inconsistent; ignoring line
Now I think it's not birds fault complaing about the prefixes. Instead the routing information found in various databases is (totaly) wrong.
Nothing to see here. Move along!
The following prefixes complains bird about:
function testing() prefix set test; { test = [76.10.159.0/18+, 203.228.216.0/20+, 201.229.110.0/22+, 206.98.113.201/29+, 151.185.64.0/16+, 23.15.142.1/23+, 23.15.204.1/22+, 23.15.208.1/20+, 216.89.78.162/29+, 216.89.79.34/27+, 64.243.224.194/27, 64.243.224.225/27+, 64.152.237.0/22+, 208.94.225.0/21+, 65.114.21.0/16+, 12.45.97.80/21+, 216.135.96.101/24+, 205.128.60.0/20+, 64.202.167.0/21+ 205.157.151.224/26+, 24.137.34.0/22+, 66.218.162.0/20+, 41.84.223.0/22+, 91.147.191.0/21+, 118.91.8.0/20+, 46.32.96.120/21+ ]; }
Bird gives this message for each of the networks above "Invalid network prefix: 46.32.96.120/21." for example. (well, in this case it might be right).
All prefixes taken from routeing database.
-- pozdrawiam Sebastian Nieszwiec ------------------------------------------------------------ --- POLNET ------------------------------------------------ --- LAN/WAN Administrator ---------------------------------- --- email: sed -e 's/\(s\.nieszwiec\)\(polnet\.tv\)/\1@\2/ - --- gg: 3973618 -------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------