Re: the balance between OpenBSD and life

2016-05-29 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Saturday, May 28, 2016, Teng Zhang <unixrea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I can't adjust  the time for OpenBSD and my life appropriately. Could you
> please share your experience with me about how you adjust your time between
> OpenBSD and your life.
> thanks for any reply.
>
>

What are you?

If you are a user, you probably benefit from OpenBSD more than a Linux or
Windows or whatever, and your time is productively consumed with systems
and servers which won't break or suddenly stop working due to bugs,
failures, lack of documentation or, hmmm, systemd

If you are a developer well openbsd is mostly a volunteer work so I guess
you do this by pleasure. Some few people get paid to dev OpenBSD directly
or indirectly, leveraging in OpenBSD to run their business, so again, it's
probably a choice, a pleasure OR an act of contribution, so the time you
put on these depends on your other joys of life (family, sports, etc)

If you are a hobbyist, you should already be using only your spare time on
OpenBSD activities, as a user or a contributor

If you are a student, you should already be able to find how much time you
can put on a subject before your learning rate and productivity drops...

So, in the end, what are you? And what's you real problem, you think you
are putting too much or to little time on OpenBSD? What's there to adjust?


-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: The kernels of *BSD include nonfree firmware blobs?

2015-11-27 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:35 PM, bofh <goodb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you understand your question has been answered over and over again, and
> is not relevant here?
>
> Why do you continue by asking about blobs in FreeBSD?
>

My guess is, he has a Nero syndrom and is just trying to light a fire, but
nobody other than Theo seem to be patient enough or likely wanting to to
bring up some gas.

Dear français, respectfully, you should ask FreeBSD related stuff like that
on FreeBSD's misc and should ask IBM, Red Hat and Canonical (or any any
other relevant Linux system, including Google's) how acurate this statement
looks nowadays. You would get a much more interesting discussion, but
please ask it in the proper lists, individually.

--
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBSD as a router on Oracle T5120

2014-01-21 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Patrick Lamaiziere
patf...@davenulle.orgwrote:

 Le Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:59:02 -0200,
 Eduardo Meyer dudu.me...@gmail.com a écrit :

  hello,
 
  I am doing some basic testings on the above mentioned scenario and I
  am stuck on some limits which I consider to be very low: I cannot get
  more than 27Kpps and 200Mbit/s routing performance without starting
  to loose packets.
  ...
  All 6 network cards are Intel 82571EB which support MSI-X and should,
  in theory support IRQ balance.

 MSI are disabled on this chipset since OpenBSD 5.2...
 You can try to renabled MSI in em(4), here this helps a lot (on amd64).

 Check the thread (5.3) load problem on em(4) MSI / interrupt ? on
 misc@

 https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg123743.html

 Regards,

 patch on 5.3:
 --- /usr/src/sys/dev/pci/if_em.c.orig   Tue Oct  1 14:45:36 2013
 +++ /usr/src/sys/dev/pci/if_em.cTue Oct  1 14:48:52 2013
 @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@
  * Only use MSI on the newer PCIe parts, with the exception
  * of 82571/82572 due to Byte Enables 2 and 3 Are Not Set
 errata */
 -   if (sc-hw.mac_type = em_82572)
 +   if (sc-hw.mac_type  em_82571)
 sc-osdep.em_pa.pa_flags = ~PCI_FLAGS_MSI_ENABLED;

 /* Parameters (to be read from user) */


Thank you everyone, here we go with the results.

Disabling PF caused a 15% performance improvement. OpenBSD 5.5 made the
system more responsive under this load but made no real difference on pps
or bps results. MSIX did not cause any trouble and it helped to raise pps
up to 30K and bps up to 240M which is better but still very low :-(

Thank you all :-)



OpenBSD as a router on Oracle T5120

2014-01-20 Thread Eduardo Meyer
hello,

I am doing some basic testings on the above mentioned scenario and I am
stuck on some limits which I consider to be very low: I cannot get more
than 27Kpps and 200Mbit/s routing performance without starting to loose
packets.

System is:

# uname -srm

OpenBSD 5.4 sparc64

# sysctl hw

hw.machine=sparc64

hw.model=SUNW,UltraSPARC-T2 (rev 0.0) @ 1415.103 MHz

hw.ncpu=32

hw.byteorder=4321

hw.pagesize=8192

hw.disknames=sd0:dc8022901cadee32,sd1:,cd0:

hw.diskcount=3

hw.cpuspeed=1415

hw.vendor=Sun

hw.product=SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise-T5120

hw.physmem=8455716864

hw.usermem=8455700480

hw.ncpufound=32

hw.allowpowerdown=1

No tuning, and no firewall to (pfctl -d).

I am routing from em0 to em1 but also tried from em0 to em5 and em4 with
em5 mixing onboard and PCI ports and results are the very same.

Output from top points the bottleneck:

load averages:  0.17,  0.21,  0.12   bgp.newtelecom.net.br18:06:20

9 processes: 8 idle, 1 on processor

CPU00:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system, 98.2% interrupt,  1.8% idle

CPU01:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU02:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU03:  0.2% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt, 99.8% idle

CPU04:  0.2% user,  0.0% nice,  0.2% system,  0.0% interrupt, 99.6% idle

CPU05:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU06:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU07:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU08:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU09:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU10:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU11:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU12:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU13:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU14:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU15:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU16:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU17:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU18:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU19:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU20:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU21:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU22:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU23:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU24:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU25:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU26:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU27:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU28:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU29:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle

CPU30:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle


All my NICs are getting interrupted on CPU0.

All 6 network cards are Intel 82571EB which support MSI-X and should, in
theory support IRQ balance.

So my question is, is there anything I can do to allow OpenBSD use more
than one CPU or at least choose which CPU will be used for each NIC?

What other tunings and settings and tweaks should I look for?

Is this performance expected to be so low on this machine? I got much
better numbers w/ OpenBSD on i386 servers.

Thank you for any hint ]:)

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer



Re: OpenBSD as a router on Oracle T5120

2014-01-20 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net wrote:

 Eduardo Meyer [dudu.me...@gmail.com] wrote:
  hello,
 
  I am doing some basic testings on the above mentioned scenario and I am
  stuck on some limits which I consider to be very low: I cannot get more
  than 27Kpps and 200Mbit/s routing performance without starting to loose
  packets.
 
  System is:
 
  # uname -srm
 
  OpenBSD 5.4 sparc64
 ...
  CPU00:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system, 98.2% interrupt,  1.8% idle
 ...
  CPU30:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle
 
  All my NICs are getting interrupted on CPU0.
 

 OpenBSD doesn't yet support any other mode of operation, although you
 may be seeing improvements here shortly.

  Thank you for any hint ]:)
 

 You may wish to try a 5.5-beta snapshot which will improve the single-core
 performance slightly, although the significant improvement of distributing
 across all cores it not yet available.


Dear Chris, thank you for your kind reply,

I will try
ftp://ftp.openbsd.org//pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/sparc64/install55.iso right
now. Other than simply running it is there anything else I should look at,
or any new command line tool to play around?

Thank you.



-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



OpenBGP - iBGP peers not announcing after 3 hops

2013-02-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello,

I am facing a strange behavior,

I have the following scenario

eBGP1-iBGP1-iBGP2-iBGP3-eBGP2

The very first eBGP (eBGP1) is my customer, the later (eBGP2) is my carrier
(WAN).

eBGP1 announces its network successfully to iBGP1, which announces
everything successfuly to iBGP2, but iBGP2 never announces it to iBGP3.

I have announce all and absolutely no filter.

If I set up eBGP using reserved ASN in substitution to iBGP2 and iBGP3, the
announcement just happens fine.

All received/announced networks up to iBGP2 are considered valid using
bgpctl sh rib det nei iBGP1.

Any suggestions on what might be going wrong?




-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBGP - iBGP peers not announcing after 3 hops

2013-02-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Really? It's difficult for me in this environment, do I have another option?


On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Florian Obser flor...@narrans.de wrote:



 On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
  Hello,
 
  I am facing a strange behavior,
 
  I have the following scenario
 
  eBGP1-iBGP1-iBGP2-iBGP3-eBGP2

 iBGP must be fully meshed, a session between iBGP1 and iBGP3 is
 missing.




-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBGP - iBGP peers not announcing after 3 hops

2013-02-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Peter Hessler phess...@theapt.org wrote:

 make iBGP2 a route server.


Sounds promising, what are the key configurations in bgpd.conf to do so? So
I can look further.

Are we talking 'bout reflector/collector?



 On 2013 Feb 04 (Mon) at 13:32:43 -0200 (-0200), Eduardo Meyer wrote:
 :Really? It's difficult for me in this environment, do I have another
 option?
 :
 :
 :On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Florian Obser flor...@narrans.de wrote:
 :
 :
 :
 : On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
 :  Hello,
 : 
 :  I am facing a strange behavior,
 : 
 :  I have the following scenario
 : 
 :  eBGP1-iBGP1-iBGP2-iBGP3-eBGP2
 :
 : iBGP must be fully meshed, a session between iBGP1 and iBGP3 is
 : missing.
 :
 :
 :
 :
 :--
 :===
 :Eduardo Meyer
 :pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
 :profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br
 :

 --
 I don't care who does the electing as long as I get to do the nominating
 -- Boss Tweed




-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



OpenBGP bgpctl(8) asdot / 4byte-asn

2011-05-27 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Is there a way bgpctl will produce run-time information not using
asdot format? I am trying to convert my OpenBGP conf  to RPSL but the
later is old enough that wont accept as-dot format, therefore I need
it in 4-byte ASN notation.

Thanks.

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBGP bgpctl(8) asdot / 4byte-asn

2011-05-27 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org wrote:
 On 2011-05-27, Eduardo Meyer dudu.me...@gmail.com wrote:
 Is there a way bgpctl will produce run-time information not using
 asdot format?

 Not at present, OpenBGP only accepts as-plain for input, it always
 outputs as-dot.

 I think we should probably change this, rfc5396 came out a couple
 of years ago and pretty much everyone is using as-plain now. (Even
 though 3.10 looks far nicer than 196618 ;)

Yeah, I agree, but the world seems to prefer plain 4byte (maybe they can read).

BTW I have read in many Cisco[1] documents that asdot is made up of

(PART1 * 65535) + PART2

However OpenBGP does the math as ((PART1 * 65535) + PART2)  + PART1.

How can Cisco be wrong again? lol

[1]http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps6537/ps6554/ps6599/white_paper_c11_516829.html

Thanks, Ill do some shell scripting to convert.





-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



OpenBGP Filter - Selectively Announcing by Peer.

2010-10-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello,

I want to selectively announce what I get from my peers (whom I am
transit for) for a certain upstream peer. I decided to use community
to do so, like that:

# Add what I get from my transit peers to communyt $myasn:1010
match from $peer_t1 set community $myasn:1010
match from $peer_t2 set community $myasn:1010

# Selectively announce it to by upstream peer number 2
deny to $peer_up2
allow to $peer_up2 community $myasn:1010

But it did not work.

I dont want to manually declare the networks I get, and my upstream
wont allow me to announce all.

What is wrong with the above OpenBGP rules?

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBGP Filter - Selectively Announcing by Peer.

2010-10-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Claudio Jeker cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:20:55PM -0300, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
 Hello,

 I want to selectively announce what I get from my peers (whom I am
 transit for) for a certain upstream peer. I decided to use community
 to do so, like that:

 # Add what I get from my transit peers to communyt $myasn:1010
 match from $peer_t1 set community $myasn:1010
 match from $peer_t2 set community $myasn:1010

 # Selectively announce it to by upstream peer number 2
 deny to $peer_up2
 allow to $peer_up2 community $myasn:1010

 But it did not work.

 I dont want to manually declare the networks I get, and my upstream
 wont allow me to announce all.

 What is wrong with the above OpenBGP rules?


 You need to set the announce type to all which means process all entries
 in the RIB with the outbound filterset. Announce self which is the
 default for eBGP sessions will block all non empty as pathes before
 passing the prefix to the outbound filtering. As soon as you do tranist
 you need announce all plus correct filters.

Hello Jeker,

I am announcing al already.

Please enlighten ment, when I do a

bgpctl sh rib out nei description

The prefixes I see are the ones the peer *accepted* from me or the
ones I am actually announcing, no matter if the peer accepts or not?

Because I announce all and later, filter by community, and the
abouve sh rib out nei d shows empty.

Thanks again.


 --
 :wq Claudio





-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBGP: 3 doubts regarding localpref, rib out and announcement

2010-05-24 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Henning Brauer lists-open...@bsws.de wrote:
 match to $peer_2 prefix X.Y.Z.0/23 set localpref +50

 But it wont work as I need. Please remember X.Y.Z.0/23 is announced by me.

 localpref for outgoing? that is useless. localpref is, well, local,
 and not transmitted to the peer. and since you're setting it outbound
 (after all route decisions) it is a noop.

I believe I was not clear. I need to set a certain prefix of mine with
a higher localpref. It's not expected to be transmitted to the peer,
it's a local router policy decision to set localpref for a local /23.

Today I do this with pf route-to.

pass route-to peer2_ip from x.y.z.0/23 to any

 sounds like you're after sh ri out nei foo

Thats excactly what I wanted, thank you a lot Brauer.


 Finally, my last doubt. I want to re-announce the bogon prefix I get
 from cymru projet to by internal BGP servers. I do announce all but
 the bogon list prefixes I get from cymru don't get announced. I
 managed to  set community delete NO_EXPORT since I believed the
 NO_EXPORT community cymru sends me is the cause of non-reannouncement
 on announce all desired behavior.
 However its still dont get announced to my peers.

 i bet this is an invalid nexthop case. set nexthop-self might be
 required.

That's why I like talking to whom knows. You are absolutely right,
thank you again :) I could export it setting it to a reachable
nexthop.

But now I tried something else which did not work.

My scenario:

group cymru {
 ...
 set community $myasn:6
 ...
 peer $cymru1 {
   ...
   ...
 }
 peer $cymru2 {
   ...
 }
}

#match from any community $myasn:6 set community delete NO_EXPORT #
[1] works great
match to $transit_peer1 community $myasn:6 set community delete
NO_EXPORT # [2] wont work, never gets deleted

My intention: export selectively what I get from group cymru, by
selectively removing the NO_EXPORT community.

If I comment [1] and uncomment [2] the rule wont match. [1] always match fine...

In fact I tested a number o rules and nome with match to .. set X
worked, when I am dealing with a prefix I got from someone else (not
announced by be).

What am I missing?


-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



OpenBGP: 3 doubts regarding localpref, rib out and announcement

2010-05-23 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello,

I have 3 simple but yet annoying doubts. First, it's about localpref.
Today I have a /23 prefix which I announce only to one peer and which
I also go upstream to this very only peer. However the upstream policy
I had to use pf route-to to achieve the desired behavior. I could
not arrange to sort a match filter which would allow me to set
localpref to any destionation for a prefix of mine (outgoing). I cam,
for sure, arrange to set destination based localpref. Say, I can raise
or lower localpref for a given destination, but not for all
destionations from a /23 source of mine. Tried things like:

match to $peer_2 prefix X.Y.Z.0/23 set localpref +50

But it wont work as I need. Please remember X.Y.Z.0/23 is announced by me.

By second doubts is regarding bgpctl show rib out. This command
shows what I announce in one OpenBGP router but does not shows on any
other one. I have read the man pages, I have softreconfig set o yes
for both in and out (which is the default, btw, as mentioned on man
page and as bgpd -nv shows me). Sometimes I use bgpctl net show but
thats not as nice as sh rib out.

Finally, my last doubt. I want to re-announce the bogon prefix I get
from cymru projet to by internal BGP servers. I do announce all but
the bogon list prefixes I get from cymru don't get announced. I
managed to  set community delete NO_EXPORT since I believed the
NO_EXPORT community cymru sends me is the cause of non-reannouncement
on announce all desired behavior.

However its still dont get announced to my peers.

I tried things like:

allow to $my_inner_peer community $cymruas:888

But they did not work. Any other suggestions?

Thank you.

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



ASN Flow Exporter for OpenBGP device

2009-12-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello,

I have an OpenBGP device and I need to find out which ASN demands more
bandwidth to do some sort of traffic policy engineering. Therefore I
need to know if there is any software that is able to export netflow
data including SRC/DST AS on an OpenBGP system. I have used pfflow and
softflowd but on the second AS is always '0' and pfflow will depend on
the ability to have pf data per ASN.

I know I can set up some rtlabel or pftable to allow OBGP interaction
with PF. However, I would need to manually set the whole scenario and
the reliability of my information would depend on my observation of
potential ASN to be tracked. Its OK but this way I miss the behavior
deviations, if a certain quiet ASN suddenly raises traffic and later
lowers it back again.

So, how options we have?

Thank you in advance.

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: ASN Flow Exporter for OpenBGP device

2009-12-04 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Henning Brauer lists-open...@bsws.de wrote:
 * Eduardo Meyer dudu.me...@gmail.com [2009-12-04 17:29]:
 Hello,

 I have an OpenBGP device and I need to find out which ASN demands more
 bandwidth to do some sort of traffic policy engineering. Therefore I
 need to know if there is any software that is able to export netflow
 data including SRC/DST AS on an OpenBGP system. I have used pfflow and
 softflowd but on the second AS is always '0' and pfflow will depend on
 the ability to have pf data per ASN.

 I know I can set up some rtlabel or pftable to allow OBGP interaction
 with PF. However, I would need to manually set the whole scenario and
 the reliability of my information would depend on my observation of
 potential ASN to be tracked. Its OK but this way I miss the behavior
 deviations, if a certain quiet ASN suddenly raises traffic and later
 lowers it back again.

 So, how options we have?

 we'd really like that functionality (with pflow(4), of course) but no
 good idea on how to do that yet.

I can see how hard it gets to be, specially to make it lightweight.
One approach would be auto labeling routing entries by AS (basic
support for it already exists) and later, pflow would check for it on
exporting time, or maybe check from openbgp directly. I hope its
possible somehow.

Thank you for your time, we really appreciate.


 --
 Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org
 BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
 Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
 Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting





-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: OpenBGP: announcing network to different peers

2009-03-13 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Claudio Jeker
cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:27:42PM -0300, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
 Hello,

 I have a /20 and I want a announce half of it to peer21 and the other
 half to peer2 only. How am  I expected to do so? Using filters?

 Can anyone please mention a working example?


 network a.b.c.d/21
 network a.b.c.e/21

 deny to peer21 prefix a.b.c.e/21
 deny to peer2 prefix a.b.c.d/21

 Something like this may work.

Very good. I believed I had to deal with some complex stuff.

I will try that right now.
Tks Claudio and Pierre.



 --
 :wq Claudio





-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



OpenBGP: announcing network to different peers

2009-03-12 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello,

I have a /20 and I want a announce half of it to peer21 and the other
half to peer2 only. How am  I expected to do so? Using filters?

Can anyone please mention a working example?

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.me...@gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmac...@saude.gov.br



Re: offloading layer 7 packet classification to hardware

2008-10-30 Thread Eduardo Meyer
how does pfsense classify p2p traffic?

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 2008-10-30, uday [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 hi guys,

 i just wanted to know if anyone has any experience with offloading PF
 layer 7 packet classification with hardware accelerators such as
 sensory networks's hyperscan ?

 unlikely, because PF does not do layer 7 packet classification.


-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
profissional: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



OpenBGP - Saving Restoring routes, possible?

2008-02-18 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello,

I have setup OpenBGP doing full routing with 3 other peers, so I get
around 240k routes from each peer. But if by some reason I have to
restar bgpd, it takes up to 5 minutes so I can all routes updated
again.

Is there a way to save and later restore the RIB/FIB tables?

Since the only problem on commodity hardware are the mobile parts, I
am also settig up a SPARE router with carp, so if one gets down, the
spare will assume. But resync'ing the tables is again, reason for a
higher downtime. So if I could save the tables in a machine and
restore it on the other, would be great.

Can I do this?


-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
profissional: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: OpenBGP - Saving Restoring routes, possible?

2008-02-18 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Feb 18, 2008 5:39 PM, NetOne - Doichin Dokov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Eduardo Meyer NAPISA:
  Hello,
 
  I have setup OpenBGP doing full routing with 3 other peers, so I get
  around 240k routes from each peer. But if by some reason I have to
  restar bgpd, it takes up to 5 minutes so I can all routes updated
  again.
 
  Is there a way to save and later restore the RIB/FIB tables?
 
  Since the only problem on commodity hardware are the mobile parts, I
  am also settig up a SPARE router with carp, so if one gets down, the
  spare will assume. But resync'ing the tables is again, reason for a
  higher downtime. So if I could save the tables in a machine and
  restore it on the other, would be great.
 
  Can I do this?
 If you search back the mailing list archive, you'll find some setups
 i've proposed, which do exactly that - CARPed BGPs with no downtime for
 full BGP refresh.
 About your idea - saving / restoring routes - the very prime idea of BGP
 is just that - to NOT save routes, and to distribute them.

 Kind regards,
 Doichin


Thank you Doichin, I will search for it and rethink my concept on
route distributing vs routing saving.


-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
profissional: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



OpenBGP - Balancing between peers

2008-02-18 Thread Eduardo Meyer
I have another doubt.

My peers have different bw connected to me, one peer is 20Mb/s and the
other is 30Mb/s.

I know I may be failing on some BGP concepts here, but this is my very
first time implementing full routing with 2 peers. So, please be
patient ;)

How should I balance, proportionally, those outbound traffic? Whould I
use weight? Examples are also appreciated.

Thank you again.

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
profissional: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: OpenBGP - Balancing between peers

2008-02-18 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Feb 18, 2008 8:47 PM, Dustin Lundquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 To balance your inbound you can prepend your AS number to your
 advertisements to depreference them. Some larger ISPs do this on a per
 prefix basis, but since a sizable portion of ISPs are running Cisco gear
 with a 256K prefix limit it is not advisable to create additional
 prefixes for the purposes of traffic balancing.

 For outbound, its easier you can use local preference. For reference
 here is the Cisco BGP path selection process, OpenBGPD is similar:
 http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/25.shtml


 Dustin Lundquist

Right, I could define the preffered outbound traffic to a certain AS
with localpref. However, I could not balance it, and did not find how
I am supposed to.

For example, I have a certain traffic outgoing to AS 4230, it was
going via AS17379, and with localpref I could make it go via 18881.

However, I need to balance it in the adequated ratio, say, make 40% of
outgoing traffic to 4230 go via 1881 while 60% goes out via 17379.

If you could point me to what to read, or suggest anything, thats what
I need, some words from the experienced ones.





 Eduardo Meyer wrote:
  I have another doubt.
 
  My peers have different bw connected to me, one peer is 20Mb/s and the
  other is 30Mb/s.
 
  I know I may be failing on some BGP concepts here, but this is my very
  first time implementing full routing with 2 peers. So, please be
  patient ;)
 
  How should I balance, proportionally, those outbound traffic? Whould I
  use weight? Examples are also appreciated.
 
  Thank you again.
 




-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
profissional: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: OpenBGP state change OpenSent - Active, reason: Connection closed trouble

2008-01-21 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Jan 16, 2008 1:15 PM, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 2008/01/16 12:33, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
  I have lowered holdtime for testing purposes only. With default value
  the behavior is the same. I have just forced local-address to another
  one, with local-address  201.70.200.2 but still the same.
 
  Here is the tcpdum output

 that doesn't look like openbsd, ours is easy to read ;-)

 the peer just closes the connection on receipt of the Open.
 you can either try experimenting with disabling some options
 (announce ipv6 none, announce capabilities no) or better,
 talk to your peer and see what they have logged.


 22:39:43.933609 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9934, offset 0, flags [DF],
 proto: TCP (6), length: 101) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
 P, cksum 0x378b (incorrect (- 0x69a3), 1:50(49) ack 1 win 33304
 nop,nop,timestamp 105683507 22565145: BGP, length: 49
 Open Message (1), length: 49
   Version 4, my AS 28660, Holdtime 90s, ID 201.87.224.253
   Optional parameters, length: 20
 Option Capabilities Advertisement (2), length: 6
   Multiprotocol Extensions (1), length: 4
 AFI IPv4 (1), SAFI Unicast (1)
 0x:  0001 0001
 Option Capabilities Advertisement (2), length: 2
   Route Refresh (2), length: 0
 Option Capabilities Advertisement (2), length: 6
   Graceful Restart (64), length: 4
 Restart Flags: [R], Restart Time 0s
 0x:  8000 
 22:39:43.939183 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl  63, id 2914, offset 0, flags [DF],
 proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 200.184.196.18.179  201.87.225.16.57856: F,
 cksum 0xf07e (correct), 1:1(0) ack 50 win 17376 nop,nop,timestamp
 22565151 105683507



Hello,

This follow-up is to thank you all who replied and mention the
solution (what is good for the history). I forced binding to the
correct IP address declaring neighbor's local address, and added a
static route to the box, instead of using the default one, although
they were nexthoping to the same address.

Finally I removed the passive keyword. Now its OK with the first BGP
neighbor, I will setup the second tomorrow morning but probably there
wont be any other problem.

Thank you all and thanks for OpenBGP. Way simple, functional and much
better/clearer than cisco.

-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer



OpenBGP state change OpenSent - Active, reason: Connection closed trouble

2008-01-16 Thread Eduardo Meyer
Hello everybody.

I am setting up OpenBGP for the first time in replacement to Cisco.
However, I am having some troubles which I could not realize the
reason myself, so I

#macros
peer_gvt=200.139.89.37
peer_intelig=200.184.196.18
#peer_intelig=201.70.200.1


# Configuracao Global
AS 28660
router-id 201.87.224.253
# route-reflector 3381352702
log updates

#holdtime 180
#holdtime min 3

holdtime 4
holdtime min 3

#listen on ip router

#fib-update no
fib-update yes
#route-collector yes

#network 201.87.224.0/20# full routing
network 201.87.224.0/23 # partial routing

# neighbors and peers

#group peering AS4230 {
#remote-as 4230
#neighbor $peer1 {
#descr   ASN4230 Embratel
#announce self
#   tcp md5sig password 7890
#}
#}
group peering GVT {
 remote-as  18881
 neighbor $peer_gvt {
descr   GVT
#multihop   2
#local-address  ip router twi
#softreconfig   in yes
depend on em1
#passive
holdtime3
holdtime min3
announceself# ebgp = self, ibgp = all - twi sera ebgp
 }
}

group peering Intelig {
 remote-as   17379
 neighbor $peer_intelig {
 descr   Intelig
multihop4
#local-address  201.70.200.2
#softreconfigin yes
#depend on em0
#passive
holdtime3
holdtime min3
announceself# ebgp = self, ibgp = all - twi sera ebgp
 }
}

#
# Filtros
#

deny from any
allow from any prefixlen 8 - 24 # publicacao de 8 a 24 bits, nem mais nem menos

deny from any prefix 0.0.0.0/0  # nao aceita publicacao de rota padrao

# Redes as quais nunca permitiremos publicacao de rotas
deny from any prefix 10.0.0.0/8 prefixlen = 8
deny from any prefix 172.16.0.0/12 prefixlen = 12
deny from any prefix 192.168.0.0/16 prefixlen = 16
deny from any prefix 169.254.0.0/16 prefixlen = 16
deny from any prefix 192.0.2.0/24 prefixlen = 24
deny from any prefix 224.0.0.0/4 prefixlen = 4
deny from any prefix 240.0.0.0/4 prefixlen = 4

I have lowered holdtime and holdtime min just for testing purposes.

Here is the relevant Cisco config

router bgp 28660
 no synchronization
 bgp router-id 201.87.224.253
 bgp cluster-id 3381352702
 bgp log-neighbor-changes
 network 201.87.224.0 mask 255.255.240.0
 neighbor 200.139.89.37 remote-as 18881
 neighbor 200.139.89.37 description Conexao a GVT
 neighbor 200.139.89.37 ebgp-multihop 2
 neighbor 200.139.89.37 update-source FastEthernet2
 neighbor 200.139.89.37 soft-reconfiguration inbound
 neighbor 200.139.89.37 route-map OUT out
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 remote-as 17379
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 description Conexao a Intelig
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 ebgp-multihop 4
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 update-source Loopback0
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 version 4
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 soft-reconfiguration inbound
 neighbor 200.184.196.18 route-map OUT out
 no auto-summary
!

The problem I get is:

neighbor 200.184.196.18 (Intelig): state change Connect - OpenSent,
reason: Connection opened
neighbor 200.184.196.18 (Intelig): state change OpenSent - Active,
reason: Connection closed

# bgpctl sh nei Intelig timers
BGP neighbor is 200.184.196.18, remote AS 17379
 Description: Intelig
  BGP version 4, remote router-id 0.0.0.0
  BGP state = Active
  Last read Never, holdtime 240s, keepalive interval 80s

  IdleHoldTimer:   not running Interval:30s
  ConnectRetryTimer:   due in 00:01:51 Interval:   120s
  HoldTimer:   due in 00:03:51 Interval:   240s
  KeepaliveTimer:  not running Interval:80s

  Local host: 201.87.225.16, Local port:  61684
  Remote host:   200.184.196.18, Remote port:   179




-- 
===
Eduardo Meyer



Re: OpenBGP state change OpenSent - Active, reason: Connection closed trouble

2008-01-16 Thread Eduardo Meyer
On Jan 16, 2008 11:43 AM, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 2008/01/16 11:17, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
  I am setting up OpenBGP for the first time in replacement to Cisco.
  However, I am having some troubles which I could not realize the
  reason myself, so I

  holdtime 4

 can your peers keep up with that? it's rather low.

Local host: 201.87.225.16, Local port:  61684
Remote host:   200.184.196.18, Remote port:   179

 is this the correct local-address?

 tcpdump -nvvs1500 -iinterface port 179 might give more clues.



I have lowered holdtime for testing purposes only. With default value
the behavior is the same. I have just forced local-address to another
one, with local-address  201.70.200.2 but still the same.

Here is the tcpdum output

22:39:40.566835 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9918, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.61409  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0x3ca1), 990673835:990673835(0) ack
1878726869 win 33304 nop,nop,timestamp 105680141 22526977
22:39:43.925328 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9930, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 64) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
S, cksum 0x3766 (incorrect (- 0xdc9c), 2171084445:2171084445(0) win
65535 mss 1460,nop,wscale 1,nop,nop,timestamp 105683499 0,sackOK,eol
22:39:43.933442 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl  63, id 2913, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 64) 200.184.196.18.179  201.87.225.16.57856:
S, cksum 0xb4d4 (correct), 1446395664:1446395664(0) ack 2171084446 win
16384 mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,nop,nop,timestamp 22565145
105683499,sackOK,eol
22:39:43.933508 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9933, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
., cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xb27e), 1:1(0) ack 1 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105683507 22565145
22:39:43.933609 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9934, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 101) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
P, cksum 0x378b (incorrect (- 0x69a3), 1:50(49) ack 1 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105683507 22565145: BGP, length: 49
Open Message (1), length: 49
  Version 4, my AS 28660, Holdtime 90s, ID 201.87.224.253
  Optional parameters, length: 20
Option Capabilities Advertisement (2), length: 6
  Multiprotocol Extensions (1), length: 4
AFI IPv4 (1), SAFI Unicast (1)
0x:  0001 0001
Option Capabilities Advertisement (2), length: 2
  Route Refresh (2), length: 0
Option Capabilities Advertisement (2), length: 6
  Graceful Restart (64), length: 4
Restart Flags: [R], Restart Time 0s
0x:  8000 
22:39:43.939183 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl  63, id 2914, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 200.184.196.18.179  201.87.225.16.57856:
F, cksum 0xf07e (correct), 1:1(0) ack 50 win 17376 nop,nop,timestamp
22565151 105683507
22:39:43.939207 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9936, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
., cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xb240), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105683513 22565151
22:39:43.939229 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9937, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xb23f), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105683513 22565151
22:39:44.163831 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9939, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xb15e), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105683738 22565151
22:39:44.413831 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9945, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xb064), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105683988 22565151
22:39:44.713829 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9946, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xaf38), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105684288 22565151
22:39:45.113830 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9947, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xada8), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105684688 22565151
22:39:45.713832 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9950, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xab50), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105685288 22565151
22:39:46.489837 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9952, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 201.87.225.16.57856  200.184.196.18.179:
F, cksum 0x375a (incorrect (- 0xa848), 50:50(0) ack 2 win 33304
nop,nop,timestamp 105686064 22565151
22:39:47.841844 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl   4, id 9955, offset 0, flags [DF],
proto: TCP (6), length: 52