mpls-linux-devel Mailing List for MPLS for Linux (Page 11)
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
jleu
Menu
▾
▴
mpls-linux-devel — Mailig list for discussing the development of MPLS on Linux
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(7) |
Dec
(8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(73) |
Mar
(22) |
Apr
(21) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(3) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(4) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
(6) |
Apr
(11) |
May
(6) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
(9) |
Dec
(15) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(1) |
May
(2) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(7) |
Aug
|
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(10) |
Dec
(14) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(9) |
Mar
(39) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
(13) |
Mar
(19) |
Apr
(11) |
May
(16) |
Jun
(6) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
|
Oct
(5) |
Nov
|
Dec
(16) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(13) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(11) |
Jun
(7) |
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(8) |
Nov
(16) |
Dec
(15) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(42) |
Jun
(4) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(7) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(19) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(13) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(11) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(4) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(7) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2015 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(4) |
Dec
|
| 2021 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Chris R. <Chr...@nr...> - 2009-05-16 14:15:33
|
Troy This can be done. It will be important to pick the right MPLS-linux patch files, as I suspected. The kernel release changes between 2.6.18 and 2.6.20 where pretty significant in the IP subsystem area. But I believe I have a patches that will work. What I can do is pull from my archive, run a test patch against the 2.6.18 kernel, if it works send it to you and how to apply it. The actual patching testing against Centos you'll have to do. Oh and I almost forget, what is the IProute2 release you are using? Without IPRoute patched, MPLS-Linux is almost pointless so we'll have to match that up as well. Well get to it later today.... ...Chris Troy Frew wrote: > centos 5.2 2.6.18-92.1.18.el5 > 2.6.18-92.1.22.el5 > centos 5.3 2.6.18-128.1.6.el5 > > on top of that, 32-bit has a regular, pae, xen, and centos plus kernel > I would recommend rebuilding the centos plus pae kernel for mpls. > > If you got this up and running, centos would be great for use as a > real mpls edge router in datacenter situations. (imagestream is the > only linux router I can think of that has stability on the level of > enterpriselinux but they are way expensive for the hardware.) > > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Chris Robson <Chr...@nr...> wrote: > >> Scott >> >> Your only concern should be the core linux release, aka 2.6.XX paying >> particularly to the "XX" s. I took a quick look at the Centos page but >> the Linux release did not jump out at me. If you let me know which >> linux, aka "uname -a" it uses I most likely have a patch file to match >> it, if James doesnt. >> >> My preferred OS if Fedroa 10, not sure why you have to use Centos and >> would be concerned that since its a Red Hat clone your kernel, userland, >> libs are limited to the release levels of Red Hat's distro. Note this >> is "not" to be read as a criticism of either distro as I prefer bleeding >> edge releases of Linux. Just call me a glutton for punishment :-). >> Actually what I do is baseline with Fedora 10, then back track to other >> distro. For example, I've ported James's MPLS-Linux to the PetaLinux >> distro, aka kernel 2.6.20. >> >> Anyway, is yu tell me your Centro kernel version, I most likely have the >> build for it. >> >> ....Chris >> >> James R. Leu wrote: >> >>> I do not know of anyone who has done this. Let me know if there >>> are any changes that need to be applied to the mpls linux patch >>> to make it work. >>> >>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 04:53:04PM -0700, Scott Whyte wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I'm going to try and get mpls-linux running on Centos 5.2 (I have some >>>> other dependencies that are forcing me to Centos). Before I get going >>>> on it I wanted to see if anyone has tried this, and what kind of luck >>>> they had making it all work. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial >>>> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables >>>> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine >>>> for externally facing server and web deployment. >>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpls-linux-devel mailing list >>>> mpl...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel >>>> >>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial >>> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables >>> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine >>> for externally facing server and web deployment. >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls-linux-devel mailing list >>> mpl...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial >> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables >> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine >> for externally facing server and web deployment. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls-linux-devel mailing list >> mpl...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel >> >> > > > > |
|
From: Chris R. <Chr...@nr...> - 2009-05-16 10:47:33
|
Scott Your only concern should be the core linux release, aka 2.6.XX paying particularly to the "XX" s. I took a quick look at the Centos page but the Linux release did not jump out at me. If you let me know which linux, aka "uname -a" it uses I most likely have a patch file to match it, if James doesnt. My preferred OS if Fedroa 10, not sure why you have to use Centos and would be concerned that since its a Red Hat clone your kernel, userland, libs are limited to the release levels of Red Hat's distro. Note this is "not" to be read as a criticism of either distro as I prefer bleeding edge releases of Linux. Just call me a glutton for punishment :-). Actually what I do is baseline with Fedora 10, then back track to other distro. For example, I've ported James's MPLS-Linux to the PetaLinux distro, aka kernel 2.6.20. Anyway, is yu tell me your Centro kernel version, I most likely have the build for it. ....Chris James R. Leu wrote: > I do not know of anyone who has done this. Let me know if there > are any changes that need to be applied to the mpls linux patch > to make it work. > > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 04:53:04PM -0700, Scott Whyte wrote: > >> I'm going to try and get mpls-linux running on Centos 5.2 (I have some >> other dependencies that are forcing me to Centos). Before I get going >> on it I wanted to see if anyone has tried this, and what kind of luck >> they had making it all work. >> >> Thanks, >> Scott >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial >> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables >> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine >> for externally facing server and web deployment. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls-linux-devel mailing list >> mpl...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial > Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables > unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine > for externally facing server and web deployment. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > mpls-linux-devel mailing list > mpl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel > |
|
From: <ouw...@ho...> - 2009-05-15 18:55:05
|
<br>PLEASE START USING MY GMAIL ADDRESS, I WILL ABANDON HOTMAIL SHORTLY.<br><br><span style="font-weight:bold">t.kleiberg (at) gmail.com</span><br><br><br>THANKS.<br><br>TOM<br><br> |
|
From: Scott W. <sw...@go...> - 2009-05-15 18:54:44
|
James R. Leu wrote: > I do not know of anyone who has done this. Let me know if there > are any changes that need to be applied to the mpls linux patch > to make it work. I may have to punt on my idea, would you recommend Fedora 8 or 10 at this point for a new lab? Thanks, Scott |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-05-15 18:35:55
|
I do not know of anyone who has done this. Let me know if there are any changes that need to be applied to the mpls linux patch to make it work. On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 04:53:04PM -0700, Scott Whyte wrote: > I'm going to try and get mpls-linux running on Centos 5.2 (I have some > other dependencies that are forcing me to Centos). Before I get going > on it I wanted to see if anyone has tried this, and what kind of luck > they had making it all work. > > Thanks, > Scott > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial > Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables > unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine > for externally facing server and web deployment. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects > _______________________________________________ > mpls-linux-devel mailing list > mpl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel -- James R. Leu jl...@mi... |
|
From: Scott W. <sw...@go...> - 2009-05-14 23:53:37
|
I'm going to try and get mpls-linux running on Centos 5.2 (I have some other dependencies that are forcing me to Centos). Before I get going on it I wanted to see if anyone has tried this, and what kind of luck they had making it all work. Thanks, Scott |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-05-14 14:05:32
|
The LDP protocol is designed to create LSPs for L3 routes in the IGP. quagga-mpls has an implementation of LDP. The L2VPN extension to LDP allow for sending label information about L2 reachabilty, including MAC addresses. This extension has not been implemented in quagga-mpls. I would gladly accept patches that did implement it. On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 09:09:26AM +0100, Ricardo Faria wrote: > Hello, > > > > I need to make the mpls paths automatically, (i.e., add a new machine and > create the mpls routes along the way) and also change the mpls existing > module to work in a layer 2 network, instead using IPs in the command, use > MAC addr. Any ideas for where to start? > > I appreciate every help. > > > > Thanks, > > Ricardo > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your > production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to > Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700 > Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image > processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com > _______________________________________________ > mpls-linux-devel mailing list > mpl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel -- James R. Leu jl...@mi... |
|
From: Ricardo F. <ric...@fe...> - 2009-05-14 08:09:47
|
Hello, I need to make the mpls paths automatically, (i.e., add a new machine and create the mpls routes along the way) and also change the mpls existing module to work in a layer 2 network, instead using IPs in the command, use MAC addr. Any ideas for where to start? I appreciate every help. Thanks, Ricardo |
|
From: Ricardo F. <ric...@fe...> - 2009-05-12 10:10:51
|
Hello, I'm new to mpls and I'm my final college project is based on mpls. I was trying to put it to work in fedora 8 virtual machine (VMware). I installed all the rpms from the rep, getting the mpls 1.962 version on a i386 kernel, and made 4 copies of that VM. Then follow the "MPLS for Linux: IPv4 over MPLS: two LER one LSR example for mpls-linux-1.95x", (i know is not the same version, but i suspect that the commands are the same). I execute all, but in the end i don't have any connectivity. I would like to know if a simple ping from host A to Host B should have a response (witch i already tried without success) , or i have to execute some special command to test the mpls. Also, for this example, do i have to add something to iptables or route add something else? Should this few commands in the example work without nothing else? Thanks for the help you could give me, but I'm starting with this and I'm getting a lot of difficulties just to start. Also if you have other tutorial, i would appreciate that. |
|
From: Troy F. <tro...@gm...> - 2009-05-11 15:45:00
|
I attempted to setup ethernet forwarding between two fedora core 8 boxes, but ebtables complains I don't have the correct kernel extensions for mpls. uname -a shows i am indeed running the mpls kernel from the fc8 repo provided here. Is there anything that may be wrong with the current build of ebtables? I also tried using the older fc6 ebtables mpls rpm but that version also error's out. |
|
From: James J. <ja...@fr...> - 2009-02-20 05:05:26
|
is there anyway get the list set for subscribers only or moderated. -- James Jones Managing Director Freedom Networks +64 6 3678300 +1 413 771 1402 ja...@fr... |
|
From: <ouw...@ho...> - 2009-02-12 03:12:38
|
<br>PLEASE START USING MY GMAIL ADDRESS, I WILL ABANDON HOTMAIL SHORTLY.<br><br><span style="font-weight:bold">t.kleiberg (at) gmail.com</span><br><br><br>THANKS.<br><br>TOM<br><br> |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-02-12 03:12:26
|
Hello Clifford, See my response in-line. On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:27:10AM -0500, Clifford George wrote: > Dear MPLS Linux development community. > > We are considering adding MPLS into our Linux based product and > contributing to your project. > > We are currently using quagga, so I assume that adding in LDP will not > be a problem. A problem could be that our kernel is 2.4.23, and > management are saying, don't' change it! There is currently an LDP implementation, it could use some work though (handling multipath comes to mind). In addition there is an RSVP-TE implementation I inherited, but only compiles at this point. > Does anyone have any experience of integrating MPLS forwarding into a > 2.4.23 kernel? Is it possible to do it or impossible without a lot of > effort? The original development was done on a 2.4 kernel so I could dig back into the archive and figure out what it would take to convert back to 2.4. My gut feeling is that not all that much would need to change, probably the NETLINK interface and the path from IPv4 to MPLS would need to be reworked. > Thanking you in advance for your thoughts on this matter? > > > > Regards > > Clifford George > > Software Development Engineer > > Paradise Datacom > > > > P.S. I tried and failed to download anything via Sourceforge, is the > only way now via 'p4'? You can pull source RPMs from http://mpls-linux.sourceforge.net/fedora/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Create and Deploy Rich Internet Apps outside the browser with Adobe(R)AIR(TM) > software. With Adobe AIR, Ajax developers can use existing skills and code to > build responsive, highly engaging applications that combine the power of local > resources and data with the reach of the web. Download the Adobe AIR SDK and > Ajax docs to start building applications today-http://p.sf.net/sfu/adobe-com > _______________________________________________ > mpls-linux-devel mailing list > mpl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel -- James R. Leu jl...@mi... |
|
From: Clifford G. <cg...@pa...> - 2009-02-11 15:42:22
|
Dear MPLS Linux development community. We are considering adding MPLS into our Linux based product and contributing to your project. We are currently using quagga, so I assume that adding in LDP will not be a problem. A problem could be that our kernel is 2.4.23, and management are saying, don't' change it! Does anyone have any experience of integrating MPLS forwarding into a 2.4.23 kernel? Is it possible to do it or impossible without a lot of effort? Thanking you in advance for your thoughts on this matter? Regards Clifford George Software Development Engineer Paradise Datacom P.S. I tried and failed to download anything via Sourceforge, is the only way now via 'p4'? |
|
From: Sriram K <ksr...@gm...> - 2009-02-05 13:03:24
|
Hi, I tried installing the kernel update in FC8 using Yum. It show conflict with some other package. Following is the console output. [root@localhost ~]# yum update kernel-2.6.26.6-49.fc8.mpls.1.962.i686.rpm Setting up Update Process Examining kernel-2.6.26.6-49.fc8.mpls.1.962.i686.rpm: kernel - 2.6.26.6-49.fc8.mpls.1.962.i686 Marking kernel-2.6.26.6-49.fc8.mpls.1.962.i686.rpm as an update to kernel - 2.6.23.1-42.fc8.i686 Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package kernel.i686 0:2.6.26.6-49.fc8.mpls.1.962 set to be updated --> Processing Conflict: kernel conflicts iwl4965-firmware < 228.57.2 --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: kernel conflicts with iwl4965-firmware < 228.57.2 Please advise. Thanks & Regards, Sriram K |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-01-22 05:22:18
|
Hello, I started the process of migrating to a F9 build environment. Once this is complete I will build F9 RPMs and release. On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:59:03PM +0530, Sriram K wrote: > Hi, > > Is there a package available for FC9? else can I create one from the source? > > I am unable to access the source tarballs at > http://mpls-linux.sourceforge.net/source/ > The page throws an error. > > Can I install the FC8 packages in FC9 if the kernel version is lower than > 2.6.26? > > Please help. Thanks in advance. > > Regards, > Sriram K > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > mpls-linux-devel mailing list > mpl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel -- James R. Leu jl...@mi... |
|
From: Sriram K <ksr...@gm...> - 2009-01-20 18:29:08
|
Hi, Is there a package available for FC9? else can I create one from the source? I am unable to access the source tarballs at http://mpls-linux.sourceforge.net/source/ The page throws an error. Can I install the FC8 packages in FC9 if the kernel version is lower than 2.6.26? Please help. Thanks in advance. Regards, Sriram K |
|
From: Scott A. Y. <sy...@im...> - 2009-01-14 20:34:22
|
Thanks for the suggestion James. I think it's a great idea. While digging around in
bgp_mplsvpn.c I came across this vty command that I believe does almost the same thing you've
proposed.
/* For testing purpose, static route of MPLS-VPN. */
DEFUN (vpnv4_network,
vpnv4_network_cmd,
"network A.B.C.D/M rd ASN:nn_or_IP-address:nn tag WORD",
I think the tag is the MPLS label. I might just be able to modify this command to
accept a route-target attribute for export.
Scott Yoder
Support Engineer
ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc.
E-mail: sy...@im...
|
|
From: <ouw...@ho...> - 2009-01-13 05:38:59
|
<br>PLEASE START USING MY GMAIL ADDRESS, I WILL ABANDON HOTMAIL SHORTLY.<br><br><span style="font-weight:bold">t.kleiberg (at) gmail.com</span><br><br><br>THANKS.<br><br>TOM<br><br> |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-01-13 05:38:45
|
Hey there Scott.
First off, I think your example below contains all the components to
a Cisco MPLS BGP VPN config and the description of how NLRI are generate
and processes seems accurate.
As you're probably seeing right now, there is a lot of VTY work
and other infrastructure required before you will get to test anything.
Also the quagga BGP implementation may not support sending the VPNV4 NLRI
or the extended communities needed to implement import/export policies.
In an effort to expose the weaknesses if they exist and to provide a
mechanism to test them you could take a short cut. The short cut
I'm suggesting will allow you to learning how to interact with the
BGP code but minimize the amount of VTY code you need to write at
this time.
First make sure the address-family code that exists in bgpd allows
for adding vpnv4 to a session. Second, create a new version of the
'ip route' command that is specifically for creating a VPN4 NLRI.
Something like:
vpnv4 route 1:1:10.0.0.0/8 target 1:1
The VTY code behind the scene would push a VPNV4 NLRI with the associated
route target into the BGP rib and advertise to the BGP sessions that support
the VPNV4 NLRI.
So if you peer with a Cisco or Juniper (or other MPLS BGP implementation)
you should see the NLRI you added in their rib-in.
Once you get this far, then you can work on the receive side, which
would be to make sure quagga can receive a VPNV4 NLRI.
After you get the 'bits on the wire' stuff figured out in quagga
then you can start working on the infrastructure to learn and add
routes from/to a 'VRF' table.
If you do not have a Cisco or a Juniper to test against, let me know
I believe I might be able to help you out there.
On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 04:11:02PM -0500, Scott A. Yoder wrote:
> Oops I didn't mean to hit send on that yet.
>
> I've been looking at common MPLS VPN configurations and for the most part they look like:
>
> ip vrf red
> rd 1:1
> route-target export 1:1
> route-target import 1:1
> !
> interface Ethernet1
> ip vrf forwarding red
> ip address 10.10.4.1 255.255.255.0
> !
> router bgp 65535
> neighbor 10.200.254.2 remote-as 1
> !
> address-family vpnv4
> neighbor 10.200.254.2 activate
> neighbor 10.200.254.2 send-community both
> !
>
> From my reading on the way that other router company does it, it's the VRF that creates the vpnv4 prefixes.
> Routes in the VRF will become vpnv4 routes subject to route filtering on the vrf with
> the VRF's designated route distinguisher and route target attributes. It looks like there can be multiple route
> targets added to the vpnv4 prefix.
>
> On the BGP receive side vpnv4 prefixes received use the route-target import to determine which VRFs the route is installed
> into (after stripping off the RD).
>
> Since the existing vpnv4 code was written to support route reflector mode it ignores the route target attributes. We'd have
> to be sure to support route reflector mode properly.
>
> Do I have most of the basics correct?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott Yoder
> Support Engineer
> ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc.
> E-mail: sy...@im...
--
James R. Leu
jl...@mi...
|
|
From: Scott A. Y. <sy...@im...> - 2009-01-09 21:11:11
|
Oops I didn't mean to hit send on that yet. I've been looking at common MPLS VPN configurations and for the most part they look like: ip vrf red rd 1:1 route-target export 1:1 route-target import 1:1 ! interface Ethernet1 ip vrf forwarding red ip address 10.10.4.1 255.255.255.0 ! router bgp 65535 neighbor 10.200.254.2 remote-as 1 ! address-family vpnv4 neighbor 10.200.254.2 activate neighbor 10.200.254.2 send-community both ! >From my reading on the way that other router company does it, it's the VRF that creates the vpnv4 prefixes. Routes in the VRF will become vpnv4 routes subject to route filtering on the vrf with the VRF's designated route distinguisher and route target attributes. It looks like there can be multiple route targets added to the vpnv4 prefix. On the BGP receive side vpnv4 prefixes received use the route-target import to determine which VRFs the route is installed into (after stripping off the RD). Since the existing vpnv4 code was written to support route reflector mode it ignores the route target attributes. We'd have to be sure to support route reflector mode properly. Do I have most of the basics correct? Thanks, Scott Yoder Support Engineer ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc. E-mail: sy...@im... |
|
From: Scott A. Y. <sy...@im...> - 2009-01-09 20:31:49
|
After some more research I think we'll need the VRF infrastructure first since both the BGP transmit and receive depend on the route distinguisher and import/export route targets defined by the VRF. Scott Yoder Support Engineer ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc. E-mail: sy...@im... James R. Leu wrote: > Scott, > > This sounds like a great first step. Please don't hesitate to > ask questions or bounce ideas off the list. > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 02:09:08PM -0500, Scott A. Yoder wrote: >> James R. Leu wrote: >>> Here are a couple of areas to start, note these are just beginings, not >>> finished products. I'm also open to other ideas. For example if there is a >>> particular area that you find interesting, challenging, or benifits you >>> in some way, let me know and I'm sure we can make it work. >>> >>> BGP transmit side >>> - a VTY interface to creating VPN4 NLRI with tagging info >>> - peer with an existing implementation to make sure they >>> get added to the peers correct VRF >>> BGP receive side >>> - implement RFC2547 policy interface >>> - apply policy to incoming VPN4 NLRI and put the results into >>> different quagga tables (not neccessariy VRFs at this point) >> As much as I'd like to get the label manager foundation done first I'd also like to >> see some quick results. I think I'm going to start with the VPNV4 exchange to see >> it working and then go back and finish up the label manager. >> >> I haven't done a lot of coding with Quagga so I'm spending some time familiarizing myself >> with the code. I'll also bounce ideas off of the list as much as possible. >> >> Thanks, >> Scott Yoder >> ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc. >> E-mail: sy...@im... > |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-01-09 04:56:48
|
Scott, This sounds like a great first step. Please don't hesitate to ask questions or bounce ideas off the list. On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 02:09:08PM -0500, Scott A. Yoder wrote: > James R. Leu wrote: > > Here are a couple of areas to start, note these are just beginings, not > > finished products. I'm also open to other ideas. For example if there is a > > particular area that you find interesting, challenging, or benifits you > > in some way, let me know and I'm sure we can make it work. > > > > BGP transmit side > > - a VTY interface to creating VPN4 NLRI with tagging info > > - peer with an existing implementation to make sure they > > get added to the peers correct VRF > > BGP receive side > > - implement RFC2547 policy interface > > - apply policy to incoming VPN4 NLRI and put the results into > > different quagga tables (not neccessariy VRFs at this point) > > As much as I'd like to get the label manager foundation done first I'd also like to > see some quick results. I think I'm going to start with the VPNV4 exchange to see > it working and then go back and finish up the label manager. > > I haven't done a lot of coding with Quagga so I'm spending some time familiarizing myself > with the code. I'll also bounce ideas off of the list as much as possible. > > Thanks, > Scott Yoder > ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc. > E-mail: sy...@im... -- James R. Leu jl...@mi... |
|
From: Scott A. Y. <sy...@im...> - 2009-01-06 19:09:09
|
James R. Leu wrote: > Here are a couple of areas to start, note these are just beginings, not > finished products. I'm also open to other ideas. For example if there is a > particular area that you find interesting, challenging, or benifits you > in some way, let me know and I'm sure we can make it work. > > BGP transmit side > - a VTY interface to creating VPN4 NLRI with tagging info > - peer with an existing implementation to make sure they > get added to the peers correct VRF > BGP receive side > - implement RFC2547 policy interface > - apply policy to incoming VPN4 NLRI and put the results into > different quagga tables (not neccessariy VRFs at this point) As much as I'd like to get the label manager foundation done first I'd also like to see some quick results. I think I'm going to start with the VPNV4 exchange to see it working and then go back and finish up the label manager. I haven't done a lot of coding with Quagga so I'm spending some time familiarizing myself with the code. I'll also bounce ideas off of the list as much as possible. Thanks, Scott Yoder ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc. E-mail: sy...@im... |
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2009-01-06 02:48:03
|
Hello Scott,
On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 02:11:03PM -0500, Scott A. Yoder wrote:
> James,
>
> I'd like to help out with L3 BGP VPNs. In several e-mails on list you mentioned work
> that needed to be done on a label manager and the new network namespaces in 2.6 that
> might be used instead of vrf.
Correct, along with a lot of other areas, but these pieces are pretty core
to the work that is needed.
> I had come to the conclusion that the kernel's implementation of namespaces was not
> well suited for the creation of multiple L3 VPNs from a single process. I see that
> Vivien Chappelier submitted a patchset that allows interfaces and processes to attach
> to a namespace. What is the current status of this patchset and will it be used by
> the mpls-linux project?
You are correct again. The namespace code is meant to provide a
process and it's children access to a private network namespace.
As you saw with Vivien's code it doesn't take much to make the
network namespace implementation useful for VRF type usage. To
that end I've adopted most of Vivien's patches into my VRF tree,
and I will augment them with some additional work (replace the static
number of VRFs with a dynamic scheme).
> I have the latest p4 code (Quagga 0.99.10) checked out and am happy to report that it compiles and runs
> fine in my testbed (simple 2 host 2 LER setup).
>
> So to get L3 BGP VPN support moving forward which subproject should I start with? The label manager?
Here are a couple of areas to start, note these are just beginings, not
finished products. I'm also open to other ideas. For example if there is a
particular area that you find interesting, challenging, or benifits you
in some way, let me know and I'm sure we can make it work.
BGP transmit side
- a VTY interface to creating VPN4 NLRI with tagging info
- peer with an existing implementation to make sure they
get added to the peers correct VRF
BGP receive side
- implement RFC2547 policy interface
- apply policy to incoming VPN4 NLRI and put the results into
different quagga tables (not neccessariy VRFs at this point)
generic VRF quagga infrastructure
- implement code for a generic interface to creating
static routes in VRFs which are stored in different quagga
tables
- implement various VRF drivers (using linux tables and rules,
solaris zones?, and linux namespace/VRF, null - just use single
routing table but warn when overlaping address space is encountered)
- probably involves modifying ZEBRA protocol ...
support for recursive/hierachical MPLS labeling
- tagged BGP route that have a nexthop that uses a static route with a
label attached, the result is a route in the table that points
to a NHLFE that pushes two labels (or fwds to another NHLFE ...)
label manager
- sync API for protocols (LDP, BGP, RSVP-TE) to query for a label
which will be installed as an ILM and distributed to a peer
- make sure static label assignments do not conflict
- make sure that 'service' labels (BGP and L2VPN etc) are allocated
and used only on like labelspaces (most often global)
namespace/VRF kernel work
- finish API for creating/deleting VRFs
> Thanks,
> Scott Yoder
> ImageStream Internet Solutions, Inc.
> E-mail: sy...@im...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-devel mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-devel
--
James R. Leu
jl...@mi...
|
14 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
