[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: routed stepping on bgpd's feet

Henning Brauer <lists-openbsd_(_at_)_bsws_(_dot_)_de> writes:

> * Arvid Grøtting <arvidg_(_at_)_netfonds_(_dot_)_no> [2004-09-06 19:03]:
> > I guess I'm still in "is it really supposed to be like this?"-mode.
>in this case, it might be, but cannot tell without logs.

Sure.  Which logs would you like, for when I reproduce this?  (There
will be a lot of log entries; too much to send to the list.  Who would
like them?)

> while I completely agree with you on the fact that sticking with tools 
> OpenBSD provides in the base install, I am not so sure wether this is a 
> good idea when it comes to routed...

Oh, well.  Trouble is, the competition consists of, that I can find:

- zebra/quagga, which is a bit on the heavy side code-size-wise, to
  say the least, and

- gated, which has license problems.

> I suspect routed stealing them behind our back. I currently do not see 
> why we apparently don't notice tho...
>> $ echo `netstat -rnf inet | wc -l` - `bgpctl sh fib | wc -l` | bc 
>> -2858
> can you look at those and try to find a pattern?

The pattern I found is: They're negative, while they should be
positive (and match `arp -an | grep -v static | wc -l`).

>> Running another RIP-2 routing daemon on these particular gateways
>> works around this
> ewp? what do you mean? running two instances of routed fixes it???

Ehm, no.  Running a different routing daemon, e.g. gated, works; it's
not what I'd rather do in the long run, though.