Hello, Felix,
On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 12:04 PM Felix Huettner via dev
<ovs-dev@openvswitch.org> wrote:
>
> previously we prevented using the routing-protocol-redirect option on
> chassis-redirect ports. However the option works fine there, therefor we
> remove the limitation.
I would be interested in your thoughts around the implications of allowing this.
Let's say you have a system where 5 chassis participate in a HA
Chassis Group for a LRP. Now let's say you set up a routing protocol
daemon on these 5 chassis, all of which will expect to speak with one
or more fabric switches, which may or may not have a shared L2 between
them, using the IP address of the LRP, which is the same for all 5
chassis.
How would the fabric react to this, and how easy would it be for its
operator to understand such a configuration?
--
Frode Nordahl
> Signed-off-by: Felix Huettner <felix.huettner@stackit.cloud>
> ---
> northd/northd.c | 8 --------
> 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/northd/northd.c b/northd/northd.c
> index 7a8148b13..c25c501d9 100644
> --- a/northd/northd.c
> +++ b/northd/northd.c
> @@ -14196,14 +14196,6 @@ build_lrouter_routing_protocol_redirect(
> return;
> }
>
> - if (op->cr_port) {
> - static struct vlog_rate_limit rl = VLOG_RATE_LIMIT_INIT(1, 5);
> - VLOG_WARN_RL(&rl, "Option 'routing-protocol-redirect' is not "
> - "supported on Distributed Gateway Port '%s'",
> - op->key);
> - return;
> - }
> -
> /* Ensure that LSP, to which the routing protocol traffic is redirected,
> * exists. */
> struct ovn_port *lsp_in_peer = ovn_port_find(ls_ports,
> --
> 2.47.0
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> d...@openvswitch.org
> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
