On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 02:01:57PM +0200, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote: > On 25/10/2019 13:57, Remi Locherer wrote: > > Hi tech@, > > > > earlier this year I sent a diff that allowed to change an interface > > from broadcast to point-to-point. > > > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=156132923203704&w=2 > > > > It turned out that this was not sufficient. It made the adjacency > > come up in p2p mode (no selection of DR or BDR) but didn't set a valid > > next hop for routes learned over this p2p link. Actually the next hop was > > 0.0.0.0 which was never installed into the routing table. > > > > This is because for P2P interfaces the neighbor address is not taken from > > the received hello but from the "destination" parameter configured on the > > interface. Since this is not set on a broadcast interface the address is > > 0.0.0.0. > > > > My new diff changes this. Now also for P2P links the IP address of the > > neighbor is taken from the hello packets (src address). This on it's own > > would make it simpler to interfere with the routing from remote. One could > > send unicast ospf hello messages and potentially disrupt the routing setup. > > I believe I mitigated this with an additional check I committed in August: > > only hello messages sent to the multicast address are now processed. > > > > The config looks like this: > > > > area 0.0.0.0 { > > interface em0 { > > type p2p > > } > > } > > > > It would be nice to get test reports for this new feature (check the fib > > and routing table!) and also test reports with real p2p2 interfaces (gif > > or gre). > > > > Of course OKs are also welcome. ;-) > > > > Remi > > > Hi, > > From first test seems to work :)
Thank you for testing! > > looking forward test it for IPv6 as well Sure, I plan to also do this this for ospf6d.
