Hi Aman,
> Having said that, it would be nice if GoBGP can determine the VRF-ID from > FRR/Zebra based on the VRF name. Assuming FRR/Zebra provides such a > capability, this will not only eliminate possible error in terms of specifying > the VRF ID, but will also allow GoBGP to ensure that the CLI-specified VRF > (i.e, its name) is actually configured in Linux kernel and is known to > FRR/Zebra. Yes, I'm assuming "ZEBRA_VRF_ADD" message provides such, but I haven't yet implemented it on GoBGP's client. > --> That sounds awesome. Looking forward to getting this patch become part of > the master branch ... Thank you for reviewing my patch! Thanks, Iwase On 2018年02月10日 01:42, SHAIKH, AMAN (AMAN) wrote:
Hi Iwase - My responses are inline... -----Original Message----- From: Iwase Yusuke [mailto:iwase.yusu...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 1:54 AM To: SHAIKH, AMAN (AMAN) <asha...@research.att.com> Cc: gobgp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [GoBGP-devel] MPLS label issue with VPNv4 routes Hi Aman, > When you say, the patch is not enough for MPLS VPN, can you elaborate on what > exactly the patch lacks at the moment? I don't yet understand enough about the mechanism of FRRouting/Zebra, I can't say exactly, but I this for the MPLS VPN, we need; 1. MPLS label allocation synchronously or cooperatively with Zebra --> Correct. I believe your current patch addresses this, and it's huge step forward (just on its own) for GoBGP to support MPLS L3-VPNs. 2. Be aware of VRF creation on Zebra; Might be optional, because we can specify VRF ID when creating VRF on GoBGP. --> It would be nice to GoBGP to be in sync with FRR/Zebra for VRFs, but it's not necessary (at least for me) to use GoBGP for MPLS VPN as long as I use the correct VRF ID while creating a VRF through gobgp CLI. Having said that, it would be nice if GoBGP can determine the VRF-ID from FRR/Zebra based on the VRF name. Assuming FRR/Zebra provides such a capability, this will not only eliminate possible error in terms of specifying the VRF ID, but will also allow GoBGP to ensure that the CLI-specified VRF (i.e, its name) is actually configured in Linux kernel and is known to FRR/Zebra. 3. Ingress/egress route (with MPLS label) advertisement to Zebra (Or more, if I'm misunderstanding) My patch addresses only 1, and I say "not enough". --> I plan to provide you exactly what routes I expect to see and what's missing from GoBGP. Plan to work on this today. > Nonetheless, It would be nice if you submit a pull request for your patch > which solves a critical problem. If it gets accepted and becomes part of the > master branch, it would make it easier for people to use GoBGP for VPN. It's exactly as you said, if the following patch will pass CI tests, I will post it as PR. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_iwaseyusuke_gobgp_compare_master...iwaseyusuke-3Azclient-2DEnable-5Fto-5Frequest-5FMPLS-5Flabel-5Frange&d=DwIDaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=I_2UmL83HQfOEoCVzChS_fiJdy8vxHF4_JM0AhcKK4Y&m=yIOuRVSMFFY0HP6LuNC4In7GquoTY7IQlqVvMl8ycZo&s=jmsZ57flCVQT16_D2UaGFljDGo31B6DHpZb98Y73Sss&e= --> That sounds awesome. Looking forward to getting this patch become part of the master branch ... thx, aman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ gobgp-devel mailing list gobgp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gobgp-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ gobgp-devel mailing list gobgp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gobgp-devel
