Re: Re : [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Jerome, > Regarding multi instance, have you considered running multiple instances of > VPP > in different containers? I did, however this is not an option as I'd like to keep my "entire topology running on the same machine" philosophy. Also, I think this could be a plus for the router

Re : [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hello Justin, Regarding multi instance, have you considered running multiple instances of VPP in different containers? Jerome Le 08/12/2018 18:00, « vpp-dev@lists.fd.io au nom de Justin Iurman » a écrit : Hi Hongjun, > There is no plan to use memif at present. Welcome your

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Hongjun, > There is no plan to use memif at present. Welcome your contribution if you > will. Of course, if I find some free time. Anyone interested in working on this ? > In router plugin, we inject links, routes, etc. from different namespace in > Kernel into different VRFs In VPP. > Not

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Justin Iurman Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 2:00 PM To: Neale Ranns Cc: Jan Hugo Prins | BetterBe ; Ole Troan ; vpp-dev ; Ray Kinsella Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin Guys, Any plan to use memif interfaces for router plugin ? Also, is there a plan

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

pr...@betterbe.com> > *Date: *Wednesday, 11 April 2018 at 20:54 > *To: *Ole Troan > *Cc: *vpp-dev , Ray Kinsella > *Subject: *Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin > > > > Hi Ole, > > I really don't mind that you all derailed my discussion. I think a good >

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

, > > A VPP packet trace and the output from “sh ip mfib’ would help diagnose your > multicast packet drops. > > /neale > > From: on behalf of Jan Hugo Prins | BetterBe > > Date: Wednesday, 11 April 2018 at 20:54 > To: Ole Troan > Cc: vpp-dev , Ray Kinsel

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

rg> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>, Ray Kinsella <m...@ashroe.eu> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin Hi Ole, I really don't mind that you all derailed my discussion. I think a good design discussion is a good thing. Especially when the end result is a better pro

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Ole, I really don't mind that you all derailed my discussion. I think a good design discussion is a good thing. Especially when the end result is a better product, or in this case, better integration between products. What I have found with respect to OSPFv3, is that the OSPF multicast packets

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

> On Apr 11, 2018, at 12:19 PM, Ole Troan wrote: > > VPP API used to program routes. learn interface events, addresses etc. Pure > user-land no involvement from kernel. > We’re also not “fans” of the router plugin. (And we’ve done a lot of work on it.) We have a

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Jan Hugo, > But this basically means that, for now, it won't be possible to create a BGP > router with a combination of FRR and VPP doing both IPv4 and IPv6 with OSPF > and BGP. > Or do you see possibilities to make OSPFv3 work? Sorry, for derailing your thread and making it into an

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

But this basically means that, for now, it won't be possible to create a BGP router with a combination of FRR and VPP doing both IPv4 and IPv6 with OSPF and BGP. Or do you see possibilities to make OSPFv3 work? Jan Hugo Prins On 04/11/2018 03:20 PM, Ray Kinsella wrote: > Hi Ole, > > I agree -

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Ole, I agree - but completely reinventing the wheel is not a the best course either. These are tried and tested implementations and are worth reusing, I do agree that integrating through the Linux Kernel is not ideal. We developed the router plugin to show that integration was possible we

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Jan, Yes we have been developing/maintaining the router plugin for sometime. Ray K On 11/04/2018 00:27, Jan Hugo Prins | BetterBe wrote: Hello, Is someone actively maintaining the router plugin? Jan Hugo -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Ole, That sounds to me like the router / rtnetlink plugins are a dead horse, not worth any more of my time ;-) I have setup a BGP session on IPv4 and the first results are not that good. The session is setup, the routes are installed in the

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Jan Hugo, > The main thing I'm currently missing is OSPFv3. The multicast packets > don't arrive in linux kernel. > Attached is a pcap file showing the dropped packets. > OSPFv2 seems to be working fine. > I hope to test the BGP for IPv4 and IPv6 today. > > I have put my findings in the

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Ole, The main thing I'm currently missing is OSPFv3. The multicast packets don't arrive in linux kernel. Attached is a pcap file showing the dropped packets. OSPFv2 seems to be working fine. I hope to test the BGP for IPv4 and IPv6 today. I

Re: [vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hi Jan, > Is someone actively maintaining the router plugin? I'm not a big fan of the router plugin. The starting point of the router plugin is "how can you take an unmodified routing protocol implementation and make it work with VPP". That leads to all kinds of complexities as the two methods

[vpp-dev] Maintainer router plugin

Hello, Is someone actively maintaining the router plugin? Jan Hugo -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.