Hi,
There are cases where creating sub interfaces for a lot of vlan
combinations (outer and inner vlan) and would prefer to match the packet
and direct it some node in the graph for control plane processing. (Think
PPPoE)
Is it possible to directly punt packets to l2 classifier? Because
ethernet-
our phy
> interface, i.e;
>
>
>
>ip mroute table 1 add 1.2.3.4 229.1.1.2 via FortyGigabitEthernet-6/0/1.1
> Accept
>
>
>
> regards,
>
> neale
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Sunday, 9 July 2017 at 18:54
>
> *To: *&q
gt;
> Show me the mfib route and tell me the ingress interface.
>
>
>
> /neale
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Sunday, 9 July 2017 at 11:13
>
> *To: *"Neale Ranns (nranns)"
> *Cc: *vpp-dev
> *Subject: *Re: [vpp-dev] A few questions rega
gt;
> The RPF-ID value is assigned and used only at the tail, so no head-to-tail
> signalling thereof is required.
>
>
>
> Hth,
>
> neale
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Sunday, 9 July 2017 at 03:55
>
> *To: *"Neale
to also print mdd->mdd_rpf_id if
> it’s non-zero.Be nice if this patch was up-streamed J
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> /neale
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Saturday, 8 July 2017 at 17:55
> *To: *"Neale Ranns (nranns)&
Thanks, I missed it.
-nagp
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Neale Ranns (nranns)
wrote:
> Hi nagp,
>
>
>
> It’s a non-EOS route, so you need an imp-null output label.
>
>
>
> /neale
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
>
> *Date: *S
e the MPLS route at the tail again: ‘sh mpls fib 501’
>
>
>
> /neale
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Saturday, 8 July 2017 at 14:05
>
> *To: *"Neale Ranns (nranns)"
> *Cc: *vpp-dev
> *Subject: *Re: [vpp-dev] A few questions regarding
Hi,
When I give:
mpls local-label 123 non-eos via 10.1.1.1 eth0
It is resulting in the following entry installed in the FIB (with
forwarding chain as drop dpo)
--
123:neos/21 fib:0 index:34 locks:2
src:CLI refs:1
index:36 locks:6 flags:shared, uPRF-list:33 len:1 itfs:[4, ]
index:48 p
ctly set the sw_if_index. That should be OK at forwarding time –
> please confirm – as the MPLS tunnel midchain has no bytes of rewrite and
> the packet will following the stacked DPO chain. But for display purposes,
> if nothing else, it’s something we should fix.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
&
ID it does not need an accepting
> interface. In order words, the RPF-ID acts like the accepting interface.
>
>
>
> Hth,
>
> Neale
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Thursday, 6 July 2017 at 11:24
>
> *To: *"Neale Ranns (nranns)&q
LOOKUP_MULTICAST, <<<<
>
> Etc…);
>
>
>
> This is done in fib_path_resolve if the path is flagged as RPF_ID, which
> yours is not…
>
>
>
> /neale
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Tuesday, 4 July 2017
[@1]: mpls-disposition:[0]:[ip4]
[@1]: dst-address,unicast lookup in ipv4-VRF:1
--
The flags show multicast, but the destination address has lookup in unicast
table. Why is that so? Am I missing something?
Thanks,
-nagp
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 7:55 AM, Nagaprabhanjan Bellari <
nagp.li...@gma
ller, the owner of the rpath, should not then free the
> label stack. This saves the allocation of a new vector and memcpy.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> neale
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
>
> *Date: *Monday, 3 July 2017 at 14:38
Hi,
I have small query regarding fib_path_ext_init which takes an rpath - of
type fib_route_path_t, potentially containing a vector of frp_label_stack.
When we add routes, the API handler stacks rpath->frp_label_stack with one
or more labels, and in fib_path_ext_init, we have:
path_ext->fpe_pat
probably not what you want. An MPLS
> tunnel can itself be P2MP so the same argument applies.
>
> If you have one or more unicast MPLS tunnels in the multicast replication
> list, then you can create each MPLS tunnel with multiple output labels.
>
>
>
> Hth,
>
> ne
ite a few of the multicast related options are not available via the
> CLI. I don’t use the debug CLI much for testing, it’s all done in the
> python UT through the API. If you can see your way to adding CLI options,
> I’d be grateful.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> neale
>
>
&
One question: I dont see a "multicast" option with the "mpls local-label"
command with latest VPP - am I missing something?
Thanks,
-nagp
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Nagaprabhanjan Bellari <
nagp.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you! As always, a great answer!
&
ip mroute table 3 1.1.1.1 239.1.1.1 [rpf-id 3]
>
>
>
> if the RPF-ID the packet ‘acquires’ as it egresses the LSP does not match
> the RPF-ID of the mroute, the RPF check fails, and the packet is dropped.
>
>
>
> Bud Nodes
>
>
>
> A bud node is a combination of
Hi,
Just wanted to understand if the following things are achievable with VPP
w.r.t IP multicast:
1. Ip multicast routing - check (S, G) and forward to one or more listeners
2. Ip multicast MPLS tunnel origination - check (S,G) and replicate to one
or more MPLS tunnels (with different labels)
3.
The same applies when the next-hop is directly attached. There needs to be
> an LSP to reach the next-hop – since it’s directly attached imp-null is the
> out-label.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> neale
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Saturday, 10 June 2
I mean, if I have 10.1.1.2/24 configured on an interface, then how can I
add another route with an implicit null out label?
Thanks,
-nagp
On Jun 10, 2017 08:10, "Nagaprabhanjan Bellari"
wrote:
> Hi Neale,
>
> Yes, 10.1.1.1 is a direct attached route, but it does not have
gt; Does 10.1.1.1 in table 0 have out-labels? It needs then in order to be a
> resolution target for a labelled recursive. Implicit-null is the expected
> out-label if 10.1.1.1 is directly attached.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Neale
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: * > on beha
Hi,
I am trying to add the following route in VPP, but it is only getting a
drop-dpo in "show ip fib":
"ip route add table 2 4.4.4.4/32 via 10.1.1.1 next-hop-table 0 out-label
300"
I am trying to add 4.4.4.4/32 in table 2 but its nexthop, 10.1.1.1, has to
be resolved in table 0 and the packet ha
warding chains/DPOs – you can see these if you do
> ‘sh ip fib 1.1.1.1/32 detail’
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> neale
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Nagaprabhanjan Bellari
> *Date: *Monday, 5 June 2017 at 08:56
> *To: *"Neale Ranns (nranns)"
>
bit for a label.
Thanks,
-nagp
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Neale Ranns (nranns)
wrote:
> Hi nagp,
>
>
>
> There’s no means to do that currently, but it would be a welcome addition.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Neale
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of
The standard route API does not seem to allow this, so was wondering if
there is any other means to achieve the same.
Thanks,
-nagp
___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
DPDK can be thought of as a device driver - there can be multiple device
drivers - tap interface handler is also, technically, a device driver. So
are the host-if, ssvm etc. etc. Their job is to collect packets from their
respective "media" (a physical interface for dpdk, kernel for tap, shared
mem
Hi,
Just wanted to confirm if this Is an issue - so I can file a jira ticket.
Thanks,
-nagp
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Nagaprabhanjan Bellaru <
nagp.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the recent change made to the above function to register for ARP
> events, it looks like there is an ac
Hi Neale,
Yes, the fix is working. :-)
-nagp
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Neale Ranns (nranns)
wrote:
>
>
> HiNagp,
>
>
>
> Does this work for you?
>
> https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/6918/
>
>
>
> /neale
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of "Neale Ranns (nranns)"
>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 30 May 2017 a
29 matches
Mail list logo
