Hi,
I have an AS (204092) with two upstreams (174 and 198507). On some
cases, the AS path is the same on both peers. I would like to use 198507
over 174 only in this situation (so, no localpref).
If I read the documentation correctly, I have take of « Prefer routes
with lower internal distance to
On jeu. 2 mars 19:23:10 2017, Keenan Tims wrote:
> You can accomplish this by setting `med metric on` in your BGP protocols,
> and set bgp_med in the import policy to affect which route is selected when
> localpref and as-path-length are the same.
Hi,
I tried this, but forgotten to set med metri
Hi,
I have this configuration:
function bgp_filter_customer_in (prefix customer_prefix) {
if ! (net ~ customer_prefix) then return false;
else return true;
}
template bgp PEERS {
local as myasn;
import keep filtered;
import all;
export all;
On lun. 20 mars 19:24:24 2017, Tim Weippert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 04:14:14PM +0100, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have this configuration:
> >
> > function bgp_filter_customer_in (prefix customer_prefix) {
>
On dim. 26 mars 09:08:25 2017, Michael McConnell wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> We are running into an issue transiting a down stream ASN. E.g. Uplink
> <-> Our ASN <-> Downlink ASN
>
> To me it seems we should only need to bgp_path.prepend our outbound
> filter, however our uplink is dropping the as pa
Hi,
I didn’t find any script to be executed on the router to monitor BGP
sessions on https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/wikis/Related so I
wrote my own:
https://www.swordarmor.fr/monitoring-des-sessions-bgp-de-bird-via-nrpe.html
The explanations are in french, mainly because I’m french and lazy
On lun. 21 août 20:29:25 2017, nixx wrote:
> Hello.
>
> i'm trying to configure bird for working with uplinks and downlinks with
> this example:
> https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/wikis/BGP_filtering
>
> i'm using truncated function:
>
> function rt_export()
> {
> if proto = "static_bgp" t
On mar. 19 sept. 22:32:34 2017, Alexander Demenshin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any reason why 240.0.0.0/4+ routes are ignored by bird (1.6.3)?
>
> I have tried to blackhole this range in static protocol, but got this
> message.
>
> Attempts to manually add any kernel route from this range were silently
>
On jeu. 16 nov. 12:40:41 2017, Shurshuka wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am newbie in Bird & BGP so pardon my question:
>
> I have server and my own AS/IP's (/24).
> I get default from my provider.
> My provider has a lot of upstreams (different IP transit providers with there
> own AS).
> I want my AS/ro
Hi,
I have a pretty simple design: two edge routers, one hypevisor. The
routing is done with the help of BGP.
regis is the hypervisor.
+-+ +---+
| nominoe | | budic |
+-+ +---+
\ /
\ /
\ / AS204092
Hi,
I don’t know if it helps, but here is the netlink options compiled in my
kernel:
regis linux # grep -i netlink /usr/src/linux/.config
CONFIG_NETFILTER_NETLINK=y
# CONFIG_NETFILTER_NETLINK_ACCT is not set
# CONFIG_NETFILTER_NETLINK_QUEUE is not set
CONFIG_NETFILTER_NETLINK_LOG=y
CONFIG_NF_CT_N
Hi,
By digging a bit more, I found that the issue seems to be with CARP.
I found that the mastership is flapping between the routers as budic is
a bit overloaded:
Dec 22 23:42:32 nominoe kernel: carp: 4@em1.31: BACKUP -> MASTER (master timed
out)
Dec 22 23:42:32 nominoe kernel: carp: 4@em1.31: MA
Hi,
I’m running bird 1.6.3 on FreeBSD 11.1-RELEASE.
I see many “I/O loop cycle” in my logs:
root@budic:~ # tail -F /var/log/messages | grep 'bird:'
Jan 12 15:5
Hi,
Thanks for the clarifications :)
On lun. 15 janv. 16:56:12 2018, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> This is most likely a result of periodic scan of kernel routing table
> containing 680k routes of BGP feed. I measured it recently on FreeBSD 10
> to be about 2.4 s on relatively powerful hardware. Not su
Hi,
I run a bird daemon on a 11.1-RELEASE FreeBSD.
If I try to reload the configuration (even without modifying it), the
daemon crashes.
root@nominoe:~ # birdc
BIRD 1.6.3 ready.
bird> configure
Connection closed by server
In dmesg I see “pid 1132 (bird), uid 0: exited on signal 6 (core
dumped)”,
On dim. 18 févr. 13:25:37 2018, Adam Król wrote:
> Does BIRD have any support for AS migration mechanism as mentioned in
> RFC7705 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7705? Something like
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_bgp/configuration/xe-16/irg-xe-16-book/bgp-support-for-d
he route server.
>
>
> https://github.com/pierky/arouteserver/blob/master/examples/bird_hooks/bird4.conf
I set up a routes server some times ago, my configuration is explained
here:
https://www.swordarmor.fr/comment-monter-un-point-dechange-partie-technique-un-serveur-de-routes-avec-bird.html
--
Alarig Le Lay
Hi,
I would like to import interfaces routes in my bird instance, so I wrote
this into my configuration:
protocol direct {
ipv6;
}
But the channel is down when I look thought birdc:
bird> show protocols all direct1
Name Proto Table State Since Info
direct1Di
Hi,
On mar. 21 août 14:48:49 2018, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> And do you have routes in BIRD? This output are routes from kernel, which
> are here regardless of BIRD.
I don’t have the routes for eth1 and brlxc in bird, as the ipv6 channel
is down.
The kernel1 protocol only imports the default route
On mar. 21 août 15:02:06 2018, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> If you restart the protocol does the cahnnel became up? If you restart
> BIRD will the channel be started as down or up?
The channel is up after either a restart of the protocol or the entire
bird.
bird> restart direct1
direct1: restarted
bir
On mar. 21 août 15:27:51 2018, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> So i guess you added the protocol and reconfigured BIRD? Or you added the
> protocol without 'ipv6' and then added 'ipv6' channel and reconfigured?
I added the protocol without any afi/safi (bird1 reflex) and then added
IPv6 channel and reconf
Hi,
With bird1, I can know how much routes are used for each protocol just
by parsing birdc:
[alarig@nominoe ~]$ birdc show protocols all bgp_breizhix | grep 'Routes:'
Routes: 75 imported, 0 filtered, 4 exported, 73 preferred
With bird2, I don’t see this information:
[alarig@budic ~]$ b
Hi,
Why are you doing iBGP between your RS in an IXP context?
--
Alarig
Hi,
I’ve set up an OSPF as an IGP to resolve the BGP next-hops on the routes
learned from eBGP sessions.
On one of my border routers (running FreeBSD), the counters are correct:
root@nominoe:~ # birdc 'show protocols all "ospf_*"'
BIRD 2.0.2 ready.
Name Proto Table State Since
On jeu. 24 janv. 10:51:21 2019, Christoffer Hansen wrote:
> On 24/01/2019 10:46, Christoffer Hansen wrote:
> > Have you setup any import filters for OSPF?
>
> Maybe export filters would be the trick?
I already have an import filter:
##
# OSPF #
##
proto
Hi,
Just FYI, I had the same issue with a BGP session today:
bird> show protocols all bgp_netensia_ipv4
Name Proto Table State Since Info
bgp_netensia_ipv4 BGP---up 2019-01-19Established
Description:netensia
BGP state: Established
Hi Ondrej,
On mar. 29 janv. 19:08:12 2019, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 05:27:27PM +0100, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just FYI, I had the same issue with a BGP session today:
>
> BTW, it is possible that it is triggered by change/reconfig
Hi Ondrej,
>From which URL can I fetch the code at this commit?
The “download” link on
https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/commit/6e8fb66859a17b295cd9246264221a75cdbe6c55
is disabled.
--
Alarig
Hi,
I added the upstream repo (deb http://bird.network.cz/debian/ stretch
main) because bird2 is not in the debian one (even with sid!) and I need
flowspec.
https://bird.network.cz/?get_doc&v=16&f=bird-6.html never mentions
RFC5575 while https://bird.network.cz/?get_doc&v=20&f=bird-6.html does.
B
It looks good from there too:
asbr01-lab /usr/local/src/bird # birdc -s /run/bird.ctl
BIRD v2.0.3-12-g6e8fb668 ready.
bird> show protocols all "ospf_*"
Name Proto Table State Since Info
ospf_ipv4 OSPF master4up 15:16:22.978 Running
Channel ipv4
State:
On mer. 6 févr. 15:51:56 2019, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> This depends on version/variant of autoconf tools. Older ones do not
> support --runstatedir. INSTALL instructions are intended for released
> tar.gz source, which contains configure generated by proper autoconf
> version.
>
> AFAIK autoconf
Hi Vincent,
On mer. 6 févr. 17:17:17 2019, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 6 février 2019 16:47 +01, Ondrej Zajicek :
>
> If you are interested and Ondřej Surý doesn't mind, I can maintain
> backports for bird and bird2 on a debian.net domain for Debian and on
> Launchpad for Ubuntu, using the packa
Hello,
It’s a bug, see the archives (or the commits), it’s already patched in
master ;)
--
Alarig
Hi,
Why do you want to prepend with an ASN that’s not yours?
--
Alarig
Hi,
On mer. 19 juin 09:10:53 2019, Robert Sander wrote:
> Hi,
>
> our routers run on Debian stretch with bird 1.6.4 from
> bird.network.cz/debian.
>
> Yesterday I tried kernel 4.19 from backports.debian.org and ran into a
> weird issue with IPv6 BGP sessions:
>
> All Peerings reported "Error: H
Hi,
I have a weird setup with a transit. My next-hop is 2a03:94e0:feff::
(with a multihop session) which is reachable via 2a03:94e0:17ff::1 which
is on-link on eno1. (your should already tear blood here)
So, when I establish the session, the next-hop couldn’t be resolved and
the route is marked a
Hi,
On jeu. 12 sept. 14:59:15 2019, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> Perhaps by setting 'gw' directly in BGP import filter?
If I set 'gw' in the import filter, all the routes are filtered, and
still marked as unreachable in the output of 'show route all filtered
table master6'
I also tried to set 'bgp_ne
Hello,
It seems that bird can’t resolve the next-hop in that case. But there is
no issue when the next-hop is announced by OSPF.
bird> show route all for 45.91.127.1
Table master4:
45.91.127.0/24 unreachable [ibgp_hv02_ipv4 16:16:24.927 from
89.234.186.40] * (100/-) [i]
Type: BGP un
Hi Ondrej,
On 30/09/2019 01:52, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 08:49:57PM +0200, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> It seems that bird can’t resolve the next-hop in that case. But there is
>> no issue when the next-hop is announced by OSPF.
>
&g
Hello,
On jeu. 3 oct. 21:07:00 2019, Christoph wrote:
> - security: no privilege dropping on BSD
regis ~ # ps aux | grep bird
root 31131 4.2 3.6 607704 602720 ? Ss Apr05 10956:29
/usr/sbin/bird -s /run/bird.ctl -c /etc/bird.conf -P /run/bird.pid
root 31209 0.0 0.0 7572 8
Hi Christoph,
On 04/10/2019 23:45, Christoph wrote:
> Hi Alarig,
>
> while searching a munin plugin for BIRD 2 I stumbled on your
> previous thread on this mailing list:
>
> https://bird.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/2018-November/012894.html
>
> as you probably know by now the counters are b
Hi,
On 16/10/2019 12:17, Twana Othman wrote:
> Dears,
>
> I am new in BIRD route server and I configured a bgp with upstream and I
> want to verify the prefixes that I am send to my peer.
>
> So, anyone can guide me how to do this verification ?
>
> --
> Regards
> Twana
bird> show route expor
Hi,
I have a setup with some routers:
++ ++ +---+
| close router 1 | | close router 2 | | far router|
| 45.91.126.233 | | 45.91.126.236 | | 45.91.126.235 |
++ ++ +---+
\ |
Hi,
On 18/11/2019 16:04, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 06:38:09PM +0100, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> bird> show route all 0.0.0.0/0
>> Table master4:
>> 0.0.0.0/0unicast [ospf_ipv4 12:15:31.798] I (150/30)
>> [89.2
Hi,
On 21/11/2019 17:46, Benedikt Neuffer wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On 21.11.19 17:09, Andrew Hearn wrote:
>> Sorry to bring up a fairly old thread...
>>
>> We believe we are seeing this problem too, since a Stretch->Buster
>> upgrade - was there a solution to this?
>>
>> Thanks
>
> The problem st
On jeu. 21 nov. 18:12:17 2019, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> Perhaps try kernel 5.2.x or 5.3.x from buster-backports?
I’m very interested by test results from newer kernels than 5.0.x
--
Alarig
019 at 6:48 PM Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> >
> > On jeu. 21 nov. 18:12:17 2019, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> > > Perhaps try kernel 5.2.x or 5.3.x from buster-backports?
> >
> > I’m very interested by test results from newer kernels than 5.0.x
> >
> > --
> > Alarig
On sam. 30 nov. 23:31:39 2019, Frederik Kriewitz wrote:
> We don't know if this might be NIC related yet. We're seeing it happen
> with Intel X710 NICs (With all offloading features disabled). Which
> NICs are you using?
We are using “Intel Corporation 82576 Gigabit Network Connection” NICs.
--
On sam. 30 nov. 23:50:48 2019, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> We are using “Intel Corporation 82576 Gigabit Network Connection” NICs.
And “Broadcom Limited NetXtreme II BCM5709 Gigabit Ethernet”, sorry I
forgot this box.
--
Alarig
Hi Vincent,
On lun. 2 déc. 21:38:21 2019, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> For IPv6, this is the size of the routing cache. If you have more than
> 4096 active hosts, Linux will aggressively try to run garbage
> collection, eating CPU. In this case, increase both
> net.ipv6.route.max_size and net.ipv6.rou
On 02/12/2019 23:04, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Just to be clear: I did forget this fact and therefore my initial
> recommendation to increase max_size with more than 4096 active hosts
> does not apply anymore (as long as you have a 4.2+ kernel). Keep the
> default value and watch `/proc/net/rt6_stats
On mar. 3 déc. 09:40:31 2019, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> So, there is 0x56 entries in the cache. Isn't that clear? :)
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/net/ipv6/route.c#L6006
I did a quick test on some routers:
core01-arendal, no fullview, on my own ASN, no so much traffic, using
On 03/12/2019 11:58, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> It's not unexpected. A cache entry is for a /128.
When I’m routing 80k prefixes I don’t want to have n /128 routes because
someone doesn’t have 1500 of MTU. Is their a way to disable this behaviour?
--
Alarig
On 03/12/2019 14:16, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> The information needs to be stored somewhere.
Why has it to be stored? It’s not really my problem if someone else has
a non-stantard MTU and can’t do TCP-MSS or PMTUd.
--
Alarig
9 7:05:49 PM GMT+01:00, Alarig Le Lay
> wrote:
>>On 03/12/2019 14:16, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>>> The information needs to be stored somewhere.
>>
>>Why has it to be stored? It’s not really my problem if someone else
>has
>>a non-stantard MTU and can’t do TCP-MSS or
Hi,
On dim. 8 déc. 22:42:27 2019, keksbg wrote:
> Hello, I need some help with my BIRD configuration file. I currently
> cannot figure out how to fix this issue (I'm a newbie!) and most of the
> other people that I know that use BIRD haven't been able to help me. So
> here I am.
>
> Error: /etc/
Hi,
On ven. 20 déc. 22:36:29 2019, Nico Schottelius wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I was wondering about how bird solves the following problem with next
> hop self enabled:
>
> R1 <> R2
> \ /
> \ /
>upstream 1
>
> So both routers receive the same routes from upstre
On sam. 21 déc. 00:39:43 2019, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> I have had a look at OSPF, but for our relatively simple network it
> looks like an overkill. Do you have any other recommendations for
> what to run the IGP with instead?
>
> The main reason I so far tried to stay on iBGP only is to reduce
Hi,
I didn’t specified the instance id in my config and I use v2 for IPv4.
It’s working for me. Here is my config:
protocol ospf ospf_ipv4 {
ipv4 {
import all;
import keep filtered;
import limit 200 action block;
import filte
Hi,
I have this configuration:
asbr02 ~ # cat /etc/bird.conf.d/protocol_rpki/*
protocol rpki rpki_alarig {
roa4 { table r4; };
roa6 { table r6; };
#remote "msi.no.swordarmor.fr";
remote 2a0e:f42::1;
}
protocol rpki rpki_conan {
roa4 { table r4; };
r
On sam. 11 janv. 18:08:37 2020, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> Hi
>
> Yes, DNS resolving for IPv6 is broken in released versions, see this patch:
>
> https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/commit/4e23b499696da81acf0ed5ad181573b94ccdb9a3
Thanks a lot, I’ve generated a diff for 2.0.7 from git and integrate
Hi,
On mar. 11 févr. 17:52:29 2020, Bastien Durel wrote:
> 7: wg4b: mtu 1420 state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
> inet6 fe80::3/128 scope link
>valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 8: wg4a: mtu 1420 state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
> inet6 fe80::3/128 scope link
>valid_lft forever pre
On mar. 11 févr. 18:27:43 2020, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 18:18 +0100, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
> > not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
> > and kno
Hi,
I followed the instructions from
https://bird.network.cz/?download&tdir=debian/ however the GPG isn’t
recognised.
root@hv03:~# curl -s https://bird.network.cz/debian/apt.key | apt-key add -
OK
root@hv03:~# cat /etc/apt/sources.list.d/bird.list
deb https://bird.network.cz/debian/ buster main
r
t; - Daniel
>
> On 2/18/20 1:12 PM, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I followed the instructions from
> > https://bird.network.cz/?download&tdir=debian/ however the GPG isn’t
> > recognised.
> >
> > root@hv03:~# curl -s https://bird.netwo
Hi Stavros,
On ven. 28 févr. 12:41:24 2020, Stavros Konstantaras wrote:
> Hi Bird community,
>
> We are investigating a weird customer issue regarding our Bird Route
> Servers (version 1.6.3) and a specific IPv6 session. Customer reports
> a sudden drop of his IPv6 session and -until now- we coul
nsidering a router use case.
> > > > I have looked at rt6_stats, total route count is around 78k (full view),
> > > > and around 4100 entries in the cache at the moment on my first router
> > > > (forwarding a few Mb/s) and around 2500 entries on my second router
>
Hi,
I recently upgraded from 4.19.97 to 5.4.28 and I noticed that bird was
using a lot more CPU (about three times).
On those two graphs you can see the CPU usage and when I rebooted:
https://pix.milkywan.fr/gallery#ugO0qVvx.png,ncr9kHfi.png
I rebooted to 4.19.113 and now I’m back to the ~10 % a
On Sun 19 Apr 2020 20:42:21 GMT, Fabiano D'Agostino wrote:
> Thanks!
> But can I also use birdc to check rejected prefixes?
If you add a community, it will be visible with `show route all
filtered`
> Anyway why do you suggest to use bgp_path.last_noaggregated?
Because you don’t want to check ROA
Hi,
it seems that for bird, the flowspec destination prefix is mentatory. I
have a session with an exabgp and if I send this
echo 'announce flow route { match { source 213.167.241.55/32;
destination 0.0.0.0/0; } then { discard; } }' > /var/run/exabgp.cmd
It works, I have the route:
On Tue 21 Apr 2020 18:08:17 GMT, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> Hi
>
> See https://bird.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/2020-February/014220.html
>
> Fixed in commit 78e4a123bb937bb45f7eaebb0ea475095443bfd0
I didn’t see the previous message, sorry. I made a package based on this
commit and it works, th
syntax error, unexpected INTERFACE
route 2a00:5884:105::/48 via fe80::ae1f:6bff:fead:2ed8 "enp3s0f1.30"
→ syntax error, unexpected TEXT
And https://bird.network.cz/?get_doc&v=20&f=bird-6.html#ss6.14 only
shows examples about IPv4.
What is the correct syntax?
Thanks,
--
Alarig Le Lay
On Fri 01 May 2020 21:12:10 GMT, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 07:46:54PM +0200, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It’s the first time I try to do such a configuration, but I can’t find
> > the right syntax.
> >
> > route 2a00:5884
mmunity from the
filters, but we do not receive it on the other side (tried with another
BIRD too).
Is it an expected behaviour or am I missing something obvious there?
Thanks,
--
Alarig Le Lay
nks also for the advices on the configuration. It dates from some
times ago now and has endured many modifications ;)
Kind regards,
--
Alarig Le Lay
it known that for the ipv6 the RPKI
> channeling is not compatible, you guys?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance!
>
> Cheers!
> Irene
You may have hit the same bug as me, this commit fixed it.
https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/-/commit/4e23b499696da81acf0ed5ad181573b94ccdb9a3
Regards,
--
Alarig Le Lay
Hi,
On 06/07/2020 13:03, Skyler Mäntysaari wrote:
> protocol ospfv3 main {
It’s `protocol ospf v3 main`. E.g. from one of my routers:
protocol ospf v3 ospf_ipv6 {
ipv6 {
import all;
import keep filtered;
import limit 200 action block;
Hi Sasha,
On Sun 02 Aug 2020 17:36:13 GMT, Sasha Romijn wrote:
> protocol kernel {
> scan time 20;
> ipv4 {
> export all;
> import none;
> };
> }
I think that the issue is there, you’re not importing routes from the
kernel, so bird doesn’t know that they exist, but you
On Sat 10 Oct 2020 22:05:45 GMT, Fabiano D'Agostino wrote:
> How does roa_check(roa_table,net,bgp_path.last) work?
> Having such a ROA as example:
> origin AS: 64513
> prefix: 78.150.40.0/20
> max mask: 24
>
> and a BGP announcement:
> origin AS: 64514
> prefix: 78.150.45.0/22
>
> so it's as inva
I wrongly pasted your errors, but 78.150.32.0/20 and 78.150.44.0/22 are
the correct ones.
--
Alarig
Hi,
On one of my routers, I needed to free some RAM temporally, so I shut
all my BGP sessions. With `birdc show memory` I saw that it should have
worked, however htop was still seeing 1.2G used by bird.
5311 root 20 0 1296M 1220M 1724 S 0.0 61.1 59h01:29 ├─
/usr/sbin/bird -s /run/bird
memory release algorithms, anyway all of
> this magic is mostly just a cargo cult.
>
> Maria
>
> On 1/25/21 8:08 AM, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On one of my routers, I needed to free some RAM temporally, so I shut
> > all my BGP sessions. Wi
.
The router has an uptime 147 days, so bird was pretty close to that. I’m
running a 4.14.x kernel.
Regards,
--
Alarig Le Lay
Thanks a lot for the new release!
I’ve upgraded a RR and a router, the build and the restart didn’t hit
any issue so far.
Cheers,
--
Alarig
Hi,
Just FYI, I pushed it to the gentoo tree:
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/20196
Alarig
On Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:03:57 GMT, Skyler Mäntysaari wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Who is responsible for the Debian packages at the moment?
> I couldn't find the build scripts for those at gitlab.nic.cz and would
,
--
Alarig Le Lay
e rather than keeping it into OSPF.
Regards,
--
Alarig Le Lay
Hello Ondrej,
On Mon 18 Oct 2021 17:39:44 GMT, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 01:20:52PM +0200, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On one router I have an interface that used to be connected to another
> > machine, so the state is NO-CARRIER:
>
Hi,
On Tue 19 Oct 2021 13:48:53 GMT, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> Hi
>
> You use route from Direct protocol exported to OSPF. Contrary to other
> protocols, default value of 'check link' option for Direct protocol is
> 'no'. Just enable it:
>
> https://bird.network.cz/?get_doc&v=20&f=bird-6.html#dire
Hello,
I tried the snapshot of 2.0.9 (git hash
71c9484b00b4428ae6c7d7c8eea6d96073683a54) and I don’t have any netlink
error messages on 5.x anymore. The exact version is 5.15.23-gentoo.
On Sat 10 Oct 2020 15:32:58 GMT, Sasha Romijn wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I narrowed it down to being introduced in 5.
stable. Before, the logs were
flooded within an hour.
On Fri 24 Sep 2021 23:29:25 GMT, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Now that the IPv6 bug is supposed to be resolved since 5.8, I tried to
> upgrade a router from 4.14 to 5.10
>
> Bird starts, however while inserting routes t
will test it on old kernels too, and if it works, I’m planning to
include it in the gentoo package.
On Sat 19 Feb 2022 01:44:43 GMT, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 12:44:11AM +0100, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I gave t
On Thu 24 Mar 2022 07:43:03 GMT, Douglas Fischer wrote:
> I know that it is not the focus of your question, and also is not the focus
> on this mail list, but...
>
> To that kind of automation, the best BGP engine you will find is ExaBGP. It
> is not focuses in been in compliance with all the conc
On Fri 03 Jun 2022 17:40:23 GMT, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
> 3) If someone use that on Linux, could send me output of 'ip address show'
> for these ifaces?
I’m using vrrp on linux, with the macvlan option to be compatible with
cisco.
Inactive router:
asbr02 ~ # ip a sh enp3s0f1.30
12: enp3s0f1.30@enp
Hello,
On Fri 21 Apr 2023 09:20:29 GMT, Ondrej Filip wrote:
> Dear BIRD Users,
> we're presenting you a new alpha version of the Multithreaded BIRD.
> Contrary to the previous version, you have to set your desired number
> of threads in config by the threads N; option.
>
> Version 3.0alpha1 fix
Hello,
I have two OSPF protocols, one for IPv4 and one for IPv6. I’ve set the
lo interface for both, but it only shows up for IPv4:
protocol ospf ospf_ipv4 {
merge external;
ipv4 {
import all;
import keep filtered;
import limit 200
On Mon 06 May 2024 18:02:28 GMT, Bastien Durel wrote:
> If I remember well, you must have a link-local address on the interface
> for it to be taken in account.
I confirm:
edge03-stolon ~ # ip a sh dev lo
1: lo: mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group
default qlen 1000
link/loopback 00:0
97 matches
Mail list logo