Hoi,
The researcher published an article which claimed bird and bird2 are immune
to the attack described.
https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/bgp-path-attributes-grave-error-handling
Pim
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 at 15:52, Michael Lambert
wrote:
> As outlined in https://kb.cert.org/vuls/id/347067,
Hoi
I write a lot about (kernel and user space) routing performance on
https://ipng.ch/s/articles/ including hardware and dataplane acceleration
(with VPP and DPDK) on small (Fitlet2 or PCEngines), medium (Supermicro
Xeon 1518D or Netgate 6100), and very large (Ryzen/Milan/Xeon Platinum)
systems,
Hoi,
Resending to @network.cz (was @trubka.network.cz earlier). If there's any
way I can retrieve the MPLS / LDP state for Bird2, I'd appreciate it.
groet,
Pim
On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 11:42 PM Pim van Pelt wrote:
> Hoi folks,
>
> I work on VPP (a fast userspace based dataplane implementation
>
Hoi Ondrej and bird-users,
Apologies for my resend. For some reason, my mail provider had tucked away
your response to my mail, which I saw only after I resent it. Thank you for
the pointer - I'm happy to test this out in the lab, and once we're ready
with kernel programming parts of the mpls
Hi Tijn
You can also run two bird2 instances, one per address family.
Pim
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 12:34, Cybertinus wrote:
> Hello Ondrej,
>
> I'm still running Bird 1.6.8, because then I have at least 2 threads
> instead of 1 thread in Bird 2. My plan was to go straight from Bird 1.6
> to
Hoi,
As a quick followup why I'm asking about versions -- on a Bird2.0.7, I do
see the delete-before-insert:
root@chgtg0:~# ip -6 monitor route | grep 2001:678:d78::6
# Raise OSPFv3 cost to prefer tf-0-0
*Deleted* 2001:678:d78::6 via fe80::21b:21ff:febd:c718 dev xe0-3.3102.20
proto bird
Hoi,
I think I've found the answer to my question by taking a look at git
history in netlink handling.
This commit:
commit 8235c4747dcc92de2ea991f78cdf9c6b8fa7f522
Author: Ondrej Zajicek (work)
Date: Mon Jul 15 16:23:18 2019 +0200
Netlink: Use route replace for IPv4
Started using
Hoi,
To close out my monologue -- I sent https://gerrit.fd.io/r/c/vpp/+/38854 to
make VPP's Linux Controlplane plugin aware of NLM_F_REPLACE messages.
Rolled that out at AS8283 this morning, and our duplicate FIB entry issue
is gone. Nothing to see here, moving along :)
groet,
Pim
On Sat, May
Hoi folks,
At Coloclue AS8283, we upgraded from Bird1.6.8 to Bird2.0.12 this week. We
use two separate processes, one for IPv4 and one for IPv6 - and 2.0.7 in
Debian is missing the ability to select 'accept ipv4' and 'accept ipv6' in
BFD, so we installed backports and version 2.0.12).
I am
ed information faster and in more convenient way?
>
> Thank you for sharing.
> Maria
>
>
> On 21 May 2023 12:23:25 CEST, Pim van Pelt via Bird-users <
> bird-users@network.cz> wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>>
>> To close out my monologue -- I sent https://gerrit.
Hoi Maria,
Thanks for the headsup! I have been anticipating learning more about the
MPLS plans (particularly now that we have Linux CP implementation of MPLS
P/PE). I'd love to learn more, even if my Czech isn't fabulous :)
Ondrej - if there's a presentation or other artefact with details that
Hoi,
Thanks for the release! I was wondering about this one:
o Static routes can have both nexthop and interface specified
Could I not have already been able to set 'route 192.0.2.1/32 via
100.64.0.1%eth0 onlink' ? If this is different, can you share a canonical
syntax ?
By the way, the
Hey Maria, Zhang,
Regarding CI/CD, perhaps I can have a chat with the folks of Flow who have
exactly bare metal mac as a service including a tailored product for CI:
https://flow.swiss/ci-engine
If the expected lifetime of macOS support in Bird is unknown, and there is
no vested interest in it,
Hoi,
On 3/30/24 19:24, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Yes, it's legal, but discouraged. Please see RFC 9229 Section 2.1:
Thanks Juliusz, for confirming and for making the allowance in the RFC
in the first place.
Attached is a patch that optionally allows extended next hop to be set
for IPv4
Hoi,
On 3/27/24 10:08, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
I was reading the ospv3 spec and this
linkhttps://networklessons.com/ospf/ospfv3-for-ipv4-
and was wondering if such features is supported in bird 2. Can we
announce loopbacks via OSPFv3 and remove the need to use OSPFv2 and ptp
subnets ?
I
Hoi,
On 3/30/24 15:50, Pim van Pelt wrote:
OSPFv3 adjacency did establish, but no routes were exchanged (also
none with filter 'export all; import all;') --
As a quick follow up to this: routes are exchanged, but they are not
emitted to the kernel.
root@vpp0-2:~# birdc show ospf state
BIRD
Hoi Ondrej, Nico, Sebastian,
I am revisiting this thread based on the question from Benoit this week (
https://www.mail-archive.com/bird-users@network.cz/msg07961.html).
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 3:25 PM Ondrej Zajicek
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:20:41PM +0100, Sebastian Hahn wrote:
> >
Hoi folks,
By means of context, I am working on allowing VPP and Bird2/Babel to
program the routing table with IPv6 nexthops for IPv4 destinations.
I finished a few small code changes in VPP to allow transit-net-less
transport of IPv4 and IPv6 in VPP and wrote about it on
Hoi,
On 4/5/24 15:23, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
I have almost implemented 'extended next hop' for OSPFv3. But then i
pivoted to supporting properly IPv4 loopback nexthop [*]. Now i have
doubts about usefulness of 'extended next hop', as any IPv4 router needs
at one IPv4 address anyways (at least to
Hoi,
On 4/6/24 10:41, Maria Matejka via Bird-users wrote:
Oh I see, it was hidden behind a login (worked for me when logged in).
Don’t know why it was set this way but now it should work, please
check if you can.
I can confirm the wiki now works.
groet,
Pim
--
Pim van Pelt
PBVP1-RIPE -
Hoi Ondrej, Bird users,
TL/DR: Ondrej's patch works and allows Bird to use OSPFv3 with either
completely unnumbered interfaces, where it 'borrows' a valid IPv4
address from a loopback device. It does so without breaking RFC5838!
On 05.04.2024 16:27, Pim van Pelt via Bird-users wrote:
**Let
Hoi Ondrej,
On 02.04.2024 16:40, Ondrej Zajicek via Bird-users wrote:
Although one could have option that forces it to interpret as IPv6, i
would prefer to have 'extended next hop' option that allows to accept
both IPv4 and IPv6 next hops in Link-LSA.
Did you mean that:
1) under normal
22 matches
Mail list logo
