Hi Aman,

Thanks a lot for your information!


> I think we'll have to try to make this work through FRR/Zebra. I will think
> some more about this.

Yeah, I agree with you. Doing look up recursive next-hops will be a heavy
burden for GoBGP...


Thanks,
Iwase


On 2018年03月03日 09:59, SHAIKH, AMAN  (AMAN) wrote:
> 
> Hi Iwase
> 
> I heard back from the person who'd promised to look into patching Linux 
> kernel. He found that Linux kernel in general does not allow recursive 
> look-up of next-hops. So, the fix required is much bigger than he'd 
> originally thought, and could take several months before he is able to 
> prepare the fix.
> 
> I think we'll have to try to make this work through FRR/Zebra. I will think 
> some more about this.
> 
> aman
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SHAIKH, AMAN (AMAN) 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:50 AM
> To: gobgp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: RE: [GoBGP-devel] MPLS label issue with VPNv4 routes
> 
> 
> Hi Iwase
> 
> As I mentioned, I sent an e-mail to someone about this error:
> 
>> [ashaikh@vsp-vpe-west ~]$ sudo ip route add vrf blue 172.16.0.1 encap 
>> mpls  80 via 192.168.10.3 RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable
> 
> Here's his response:
> 
> "Looks like the MPLS code is not handling recursive lookups - which it should.
> 
> I'll work on patch when I get a few minutes; should be able to get to it by 
> the end of this week"
> 
> So, I'd suggest let's wait till I get his patch and get to try it out in my 
> test-bed. If it works, things will be considerably simpler.
> 
> aman
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iwase Yusuke [mailto:iwase.yusu...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 7:31 PM
> 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,
> 
> I really appreciate!
> I will also try them through sending message to FRR/Zebra.
> 
> Thanks,
> Iwase
> 
> 
> On 2018年02月14日 04:10, SHAIKH, AMAN  (AMAN) wrote:
>>
>> Hi Iwase
>>
>> I tried the following, but got an error:
>> [ashaikh@vsp-vpe-west ~]$ sudo ip route add vrf blue 172.16.0.1 encap 
>> mpls  80 via 192.168.10.3 RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable
>>
>> I'm going to ask someone who knows more about how MPLS and VRFs work on 
>> Linux to see if there is some other way to make this work.
>>
>> aman
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Iwase Yusuke [mailto:iwase.yusu...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:54 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,
>>
>> Thank you for your confirmation!
>>
>>   > --> This is definitely a possibility except you will have to consult 
>> FRR/Zebra  > to determine 'dev ens8' part, right? In any case, I will try 
>> this out in my  > testbed and let you know what happens.
>>
>> Oops, I mistook. I want to remove 'dev ens8' part too, because GoBGP is not 
>> maintaining the info (or list) of the interfaces. Ideally, I want to push 
>> routes with only BGP's next-hop like;
>>       $ ip route show vrf blue ...<snip>
>>       172.16.0.1 encap mpls  80 via 192.168.10.3
>>       192.168.1.0/24 encap mpls  80 via 192.168.10.3
>>
>> If possible, I guess we can make the ZClient implementation keep 
>> (relatively) simple.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Iwase
>>
>>
>> On 2018年02月13日 11:17, SHAIKH, AMAN  (AMAN) wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Iwase
>>>
>>> Comments inline ...
>>>
>>>    > This is perhaps a complicated transaction with FRR/Zebra. GoBGP will 
>>> have to  > do this transaction when it imports a VPNv4 route into a VRF. It 
>>> will have to  > instruct FRR/Zebra with two things:
>>>    > - Encapsulate the route with label associated with it.
>>>    > - Resolve the BGP next-hop in the default forwarding table even though 
>>> the  > route is installed in the blue VRF.
>>>    >
>>>    > Let me know what your thoughts are.
>>>
>>> Let me clear my head, first.
>>> You mean the current GoBGP "additionally" need to install two route;
>>>
>>> 1. forwarding MPLS labeled traffic to VRF;
>>>       $ ip -f mpls route show ...<snip>
>>>       80 dev blue
>>>
>>> --> Without this route, MPLS labeled traffic coming from the backbone will 
>>> be dropped by the PE. This route tells PE to pop VRF-label (80) from the 
>>> packet and consult the forwarding table of blue VRF for the IP destination 
>>> address stored in the IP portion of the packet.
>>>
>>> 2. pushing traffic from ECs to MPLS backbone;
>>>       $ ip route show vrf blue ...<snip>
>>>       172.16.0.1 encap mpls  19/80 via 10.202.0.8 dev ens8
>>>       192.168.1.0/24 encap mpls  19/80 via 10.202.0.8 dev ens8
>>>
>>> For the "1." route, I guess we can install it when creating VRF, but not 
>>> yet implemented.
>>>
>>> --> Yes, agree with you.
>>>
>>> For the "2." route, related to the latter point you mentioned, can we 
>>> specify them like the following?
>>>       $ ip route show vrf blue ...<snip>
>>>       172.16.0.1 encap mpls  80 via 192.168.10.3  dev ens8
>>>       192.168.1.0/24 encap mpls  80 via 192.168.10.3  dev ens8
>>>
>>> --> This is definitely a possibility except you will have to consult 
>>> FRR/Zebra to determine 'dev ens8' part, right? In any case, I will try this 
>>> out in my testbed and let you know what happens.
>>>
>>> In other words, I want to avoid resolving the outer label and MPLS's 
>>> next-hop from the BGP's next-hop (if we can). I guess it helps the 
>>> implementation simple.
>>>
>>> --> Yes, I understand.
>>>
>>> I took a (little) look at FRRouting implementation, bgpd does not seem to 
>>> resolve the outer label and MPLS's next-hop from the BGP's next-hop, 
>>> because it does not call "*_NEXTHOP_LOOKUP" messages.
>>>
>>> --> I'm not surprised FRR's bgpd does not handle this. It's fairly 
>>> complicated given multi-step resolution of BGP next-hop along with multiple 
>>> VRFs.
>>>
>>> aman
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> -------- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's 
>>> most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org!
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__sdm.link_slashdot
>>> &
>>> d=DwIDaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=I_2UmL83HQfOEoCVzChS_fiJdy8vxHF4_
>>> J
>>> M0AhcKK4Y&m=rp0W2LFXGi63VxNF9MB34SGLxRD2n_CAypR-qqMoDEI&s=f1tsvXH69Ar
>>> 9
>>> Y3qVCi94zCmOGEzTWyBFLH31rrZEscY&e=
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gobgp-devel mailing list
>>> gobgp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.sourceforg
>>> e
>>> .net_lists_listinfo_gobgp-2Ddevel&d=DwIDaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r
>>> =
>>> I_2UmL83HQfOEoCVzChS_fiJdy8vxHF4_JM0AhcKK4Y&m=rp0W2LFXGi63VxNF9MB34SG
>>> L
>>> xRD2n_CAypR-qqMoDEI&s=uHUJBsM7DRJzTnA7T41g0oWQE0Ovu50Pq7gSubJdrCs&e=
>>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -------- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's 
>> most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org!
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__sdm.link_slashdot&;
>> d=DwIDaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=I_2UmL83HQfOEoCVzChS_fiJdy8vxHF4_J
>> M0AhcKK4Y&m=i8vqRael0CLkyTAEGntuf6N-vnFvflmoA6h5_g7Pnn4&s=_jBM2i2ugJ9t
>> ATuGK_BKOc7kG33o7HRIbaLO43S3v6o&e=
>> _______________________________________________
>> gobgp-devel mailing list
>> gobgp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.sourceforge
>> .net_lists_listinfo_gobgp-2Ddevel&d=DwIDaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=
>> I_2UmL83HQfOEoCVzChS_fiJdy8vxHF4_JM0AhcKK4Y&m=i8vqRael0CLkyTAEGntuf6N-
>> vnFvflmoA6h5_g7Pnn4&s=ID_j23zA8zV3aMKpozvGWGF6OWVHDmNHhIvr89tma9o&e=
>>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to