Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2 RFC3630 Support

Hi, Checked the documents, Looks like support for "Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2 RFC3630" is not there yet in bird routing. Can you please confirm? Any plans to support it? Thanks and Regards,Senthil

periodic krt_scan when learning and import is not enabled

Hi, I assume when kernel protocol is configured with export all “protocolkernel {ipv4 { export all;};}”, bird performs synchronization of bird's routingtables with the OS kernel. When the learn switch is disabled and no import is there,why bird is doing a periodic krt_scan and sends netlink r

Re: Sync with userspace instead of kernel

Hi Ondrej, This was the first thread on this topic, and the use case for that was to use with DPDK application in the user space. https://bird.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/2018-December/012973.html Our use case is, we already have a protocol stack other than bird that updates routed(RTM rout

Re: Sync with userspace instead of kernel

wrote: Hi, I was able to achieve this with a few small custom changes to bird: https://github.com/cjdoucette/bird/commits/gatekeeper I don’t know if this ability has been added to the bird mainline since I did this. Hope that helps,Cody On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 9:59 PM Senthil Kumar Nagappan

Re: Sync with userspace instead of kernel

Hi, I see the enclosed thread in this topic, just wanted to know in the latest bird version do we have any support to sync the bird route table to another user space process. If not, please suggest best possible ways to achieve the same. Preferably with no change or very minimal changes to the

When router becomes ABR, ospf is restarted

Hi, While adding an area and if the router becomesABR, entire ospf protocol is restarted which deletes all the neighbors and adjacencies. can we not do this gracefully with the minimum disturbance toprotocol, like resending the router lsa with B bit enabled, redoing summary-lsasand route calcul

Re: Compilation directive LOCAL_DEBUG and DBG()

bug;/* Debugging flags */) like D_DBG and move the exiting use of DBG() to this?  On Sunday, July 18, 2021, 11:54:46 AM GMT+5:30, Maria Matejka wrote: Hello! On 7/18/21 7:48 AM, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: > Hi, > > To enable debug outputs using DBG macro, it requires LO

Compilation directive LOCAL_DEBUG and DBG()

Hi, To enable debug outputs using DBG macro, it requires LOCAL_DEBUG or GLOBAL_DEBUG to be defined during compilation. 1. Defined it in the Makefile as below. Is there an option without changing the auto generated Makefile? CFLAGS=$(CPPFLAGS) -g -O2 -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-strict-over

Re: ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

Fri, 2021-05-07 at 14:03 +0000, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: > > Hi Jocke, > > > > yes i missed to take care of the ospfv3/ipv6 cases wherever im sending > > using allospfrouters as src ip. > > your are right, mcast changes in packet.c is mostly hack since im not > &g

Re: ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

work in the standard linux system, were both the adj comes up fine? Thanks and Regards,Senthil On Friday, May 7, 2021, 04:39:32 PM GMT+5:30, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: On Fri, May 07, 2021 at 04:53:44AM +0000, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: >  Hi Joakim, > Thanks for your response. &g

Re: ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

:20 PM GMT+5:30, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: On Fri, 2021-05-07 at 13:50 +, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: > Yes, there is a switch in between. hmm, I am not familiar with eth PtoP I/Fs but if you have a switch then the different links can see each others pkgs (broadcast etc.). Not sure t

Re: ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

06:14:16 PM GMT+5:30, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: On Thu, 2021-05-06 at 17:09 +0000, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: > Hi, > > I did sent this message a week back but I could not see it in the mailing, > moreover just now subscribed to this mailing list, so sending this again. >

Re: ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

Yes, there is a switch in between. On Friday, May 7, 2021, 06:17:28 PM GMT+5:30, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: On Fri, 2021-05-07 at 04:53 +, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: > Hi Joakim, > > Thanks for your response. > > Will try to elaborate point2 with sample config. &g

Re: ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: On Thu, 2021-05-06 at 20:30 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > On Thu, 2021-05-06 at 17:09 +0000, Senthil Kumar Nagappan wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I did sent this message a week back but I could not see it in the mailing, > > moreover just now

ospf ptp link sending unicast packets instead of multicast; peer address config not required

Hi, I did sent this message a week back but I could not see it in the mailing, moreover just now subscribed to this mailing list, so sending this again. I’m seeing some issues with ospf adj over ptpnumbered/unnumbered interface.  1. Forp2p connections, ospf should be sending only multicast packets