On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 12:18:07PM +0200, Sylvain Coutant wrote: > Hi, > > OpenBSD-current amd64 from around march, 20th. > > Next to a reboot, OpenBGP had a problem validating NextHops : > > Nexthop State > x.x.x.105 invalid vlan97 UP, Ethernet, no carrier, 100 MBit/s >
What was the state of the parent interface and what kind of interface is it? > I had about 30 addresses on different vlans in this case. This resulted > in the BGP session being up but routes were not valid, thus not > installed. I tried to "ifconfig down" one vlan and it crashed the whole > box. Once rebooted, everything was fine. > ifconfig down should not crash the box. Panic message and trace would be interesting. > > There is two points about this : > > - Why is this happening ? What can I do to avoid this and/or get back > into business without crashing the system ? Could this have to do with > the OpenBGP/kroute.c patch sent yesterday ? > This could fix your problem. The Henning's kroute.c diff fixes problem with interface state change messages. Running without it may result in wrong reported link states. > - Shouldn't OpenBGP drop the session if the nexthop is not valid ? In > our case, we do announce another AS behind us. Sessions were up, so I > believe routes were announced to everybody. But as nexthop was declared > invalid, routes to this AS were not installed. I think this could have > created a loop : our upstream provider was sending packets for this > customer's routes. As we hadn't routes installed for customer's prefix, > we were sending back the packets to upstream ... > No, the session and the nexthop are two different things. The prefix is just marked as invalid and not considered for routing. -- :wq Claudio
