[email protected] вт, 3 мар. 2026 г. в 06:24, Matthew Smith via lists.fd.io <mgsmith= [email protected]>:
> > Hi Inder, > > Here are some answers to your questions... > > Is this an expected behavior when using the same VR ID across different >> interfaces and FIB tables? > > > It's not an intended behavior. I would expect things to work with your > setup , but I have never tried using VRs with the same VR ID on > subinterfaces of the same physical interface which are attached to > different FIB tables. I have tested many times with subinterfaces using the > same VR ID on the same physical interface with both subinterfaces using the > default FIB table and that has worked. > > >> Could this be a known issue or limitation in VPP 24.02? > > > It's not a known issue. So if you're asking if it might possibly be fixed > in a newer release than 24.02, I don't know. If it was caused as a side > effect of some bug unrelated to VRRP, maybe it works in a newer version. > But the issue has not been specifically addressed since 24.02 because > you're the first person to report it that I know of. > > Are there any recommended best practices for handling VRRP instances >> across multiple FIB tables? > > > There are no documented best practices. One suggestion I can make is to > try using a different VR ID on one of the VRs and see if the behavior > changes. > >> Please let us know if additional logs, configuration snippets, or packet >> captures would help in analyzing the issue further. >> > Yes, all of that stuff would help :) > > If you send the commands you are using to configure VPP, a packet capture > of one of the ping packets being dropped and output of 'vppctl show > hardware-interfaces', that might help me make a better guess on what's > causing the issue. > > Thanks, > -Matt > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 8:53 AM Inder via lists.fd.io <inderpalpatheja= > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Team, >> >> Dear VPP Community, >> >> We are currently using *VPP version 24.02* and have encountered an issue >> related to VRRP configuration. We would appreciate your guidance on this >> behavior. >> Setup Details >> >> - >> >> Two VMs configured in an active/backup redundancy model. >> - >> >> A VRRP instance (VR ID 101) is configured on interface eth0.1. >> - >> >> eth0.1 is associated with *FIB table 1*. >> - >> >> Both VMs participate in this VRRP instance, with one acting as >> *Master* and the other as *Backup*. >> - >> >> In this setup, the Backup VM is able to successfully ping the VRRP >> VIP. >> >> Issue Observed >> >> When we configure a second VRRP instance with the *same VR ID (101)* on >> a different interface (eth0.2), where: >> >> - >> >> eth0.2 belongs to a separate FIB table (FIB table 2), >> >> we observe the following behavior: >> >> - >> >> The Backup VM is no longer able to ping the VRRP VIP of the first >> VRRP instance. >> - >> >> This functionality was working correctly prior to configuring the >> second VRRP instance. >> >> Additional Observation >> >> - >> >> After restarting the VPP service, the ping to the first VRRP VIP from >> the Backup VM starts working again. >> - >> >> We understand that using the same VR ID results in the same Virtual >> MAC address. >> - >> >> However, we are unsure why restarting VPP restores correct behavior. >> >> Query >> >> 1. >> >> Is this an expected behavior when using the same VR ID across >> different interfaces and FIB tables? >> 2. >> >> Could this be a known issue or limitation in VPP 24.02? >> 3. >> >> Are there any recommended best practices for handling VRRP instances >> across multiple FIB tables? >> >> Please let us know if additional logs, configuration snippets, or packet >> captures would help in analyzing the issue further. >> >> Thank you in advance for your support. >> >> regards >> Inder >> >> >> >> > > > -- С уважением, Максим Бурунов начальник отдела информационных технологий ООО "Сотрудник" www.digibi.ru video.digibi.ru Тел. сот. +7 (960) 945-2996 Тел. раб. +7 (3854) 30-28-28
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#26856): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/26856 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/118013037/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/leave/14379924/21656/631435203/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
