On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:35:46PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > Can anyone suggest clues as to a reasonably successful way to handle > receiving an IX /24 over both OSPF and BGP? > > If ospfd has to be restarted and bgpd gets to install the /24 before > the new ospfd, the nexthops within that subnet become invalid. > > I couldn't think of a way to recover from this short of stopping both > routing daemons, then restarting ospfd and bgpd in that order (bouncing > all the e-bgp which I'd rather not if possible). >
What version are you running. This should be fixed since some time: # cvs log -r1.26 kroute.c ... revision 1.26 date: 2006/03/08 13:49:07; author: claudio; state: Exp; lines: +51 -29 Fix logic of the kroute code. First of all there was a porblem if a prefix is known via kernel and ospf. If the kernel route is removed the ospf one was not added to the FIB. This is an uncommon event so it is OK to request an update from the RIB in this case. Additionally ospfd treated bgpd inserted routes like static routes. This is wrong because IGP routes habe a higher preference over EGP routes. In this case a bgpd route needs to be overridden by a ospfd one. With these to fixes bgpd and ospfd start to play nicely together. OK norby@ -- :wq Claudio
