On Tue, 25 Feb 2020, Maria Matějka wrote:
> > - Is "define force_roa_table_update = 1582237716;" still needed with BIRD
> >2.0.7 to ensure proper revalidation?
> Yes. The autorevalidation is in code collision with ongoing structural changes
> of route propagation inside BIRD which is needed to
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020, Chriztoffer Hansen wrote:
> > Is the above under any circumstances valid in any BIRD 1.x version? I did
> > not use BIRD 1.x much, but I thought it is strictly either IPv4 or IPv6...
>
> Correct,
>
> what you fx. can do is:
Okay, while I'm using something similar for BIRD 2.
Hi,
Robert Scheck skrev:
> Hello Maria,
>
> as of writing, OpenBSD rpki-client produces an output file for BIRD 1.x
> like the following, where IPv4 and IPv6 end up in the same table. For me
> this ends with "This is an IPv4 router, therefore IPv6 addresses are not
> supported" error on BIRD 1.x
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 12:36:32AM +0100, Robert Scheck wrote:
> Hello Maria,
>
> as of writing, OpenBSD rpki-client produces an output file for BIRD 1.x
> like the following, where IPv4 and IPv6 end up in the same table. For me
> this ends with "This is an IPv4 router, therefore IPv6 addresses ar
Hello Maria,
as of writing, OpenBSD rpki-client produces an output file for BIRD 1.x
like the following, where IPv4 and IPv6 end up in the same table. For me
this ends with "This is an IPv4 router, therefore IPv6 addresses are not
supported" error on BIRD 1.x all the time...am I overlooking someth
Hello!
> I wonder if there's a good, full example about ROA with static protocol in
> BIRD 2. The following snippet is only for BIRD 1.x, right?
>
> --- %< ---
> roa table roa {
> roa 1.0.0.0/24 max 24 as 13335;
> # […]
> }
> --- %< ---
Yes.
> Based
Good evening,
I wonder if there's a good, full example about ROA with static protocol in
BIRD 2. The following snippet is only for BIRD 1.x, right?
--- %< ---
roa table roa {
roa 1.0.0.0/24 max 24 as 13335;
# […]
}
--- %< ---
Based on various snippets and half examples on the Int
