Hi Dumitru, I’ve got a general question about what the logical topology you’d like to implement.
Also, please see inline comments. Regards, Vladislav Odintsov > On 14 Feb 2022, at 15:51, Dumitru Ceara <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Vladislav, > > I was looking at what options we have in OVN to implement a VRF-like > behavior and then remembered you had worked on the multiple routing > table feature. > > On 11/19/21 17:07, Vladislav Odintsov wrote: >> This patch extends Logical Router's routing functionality. >> Now user may create multiple routing tables within a Logical Router >> and assign them to Logical Router Ports. >> >> Traffic coming from Logical Router Port with assigned route_table >> is checked against Logical_Router_Static_Routes with same route_table >> field value and routes to connected networks. If no route_table option >> is set to the LRP, routes' lookup is done agains routes with no >> route_table field value ("", empty string) and against routes to >> connected networks. > > I was a bit surprised by the fact that if there's no static route with > the same route_table value as the ingress router port we go ahead and > match against all connected networks, regardless of their ports' route > tables. The current behaviour is expected — earlier while code review I’ve described it’s similar to AWS/GCP VPC lookup logic: the "local" route (route to connected networks/subnets) is present always and can’t be deleted or modified. This means that "connected" routes (including learned routes from other AZs, which have "connected" origin) are installed in the routing table regardless of their `route_table` value. But the user may create more specific static route if he/she needs it and this route doesn’t break necessary connectivity. > Does it make sense to change this and perform longest prefix match in > general, always matching on route_table? I can’t imagine how to easy support current behaviour with such change. I mean how to force a match against all connected routes regardless of routing table. The only one option I see is to add an option for LR, which configures a mode of local routes match: with or without route_table value respect. > > In this case connected routes could inherit the route_table value from > the corresponding router ports where they're defined. > > Would that break your use case? Please, see previous comment. > > Thanks, > Dumitru > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
