bgp_update is a very expensive call. Calling evpn_overlay_free
even when we have no evpn data to free is not trivial. Let's
limit the call into this function until we actually have data to
free.
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@nvidia.com>
Memory was not zeroed at allocation.
> ==2604268== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> ==2604268== at 0x26F026: bgp_labels_unintern (bgp_label.c:116)
> ==2604268== by 0x30000C: adj_free (bgp_updgrp_adv.c:81)
> ==2604268== by 0x3019EE: bgp_adj_out_remove_subgroup (bgp_updgrp_adv.c:728)
> ==2604268== by 0x30537C: subgroup_withdraw_packet (bgp_updgrp_packet.c:1042)
> ==2604268== by 0x2970AF: bgp_generate_updgrp_packets (bgp_packet.c:508)
> ==2604268== by 0x49E06F1: event_call (event.c:2001)
> ==2604268== by 0x495AB8B: frr_run (libfrr.c:1238)
> ==2604268== by 0x200C4B: main (bgp_main.c:555)
Fixes: 3c86f776f0 ("bgpd: add bgp_labels hash")
Signed-off-by: Louis Scalbert <louis.scalbert@6wind.com>
Extended communities can be transitive or non-transitive.
Like other attributes (e.g., MED) non-transitive extended communities SHOULD
be sent to the direct peer, but not forward them to eBGP peers next.
Before this patch, we never send non-transitive extended attributes to the
direct peers at all.
Signed-off-by: Donatas Abraitis <donatas@opensourcerouting.org>
If we received a non-transitive extended community (in this case it was
extended link-bandwidth), we treated it as unknown because we didn't check for
the transitive flag correctly.
Signed-off-by: Donatas Abraitis <donatas@opensourcerouting.org>
When we use the no area X.X.X.X range A.B.C.D/M command, if the area no longer has an interface to which it belongs, then the area should be deleted from the LSDB. This processing logic is consistent with instructions such as no network area and no area authentication.
Signed-off-by: Shbinging <bingshui@smail.nju.edu.cn>
NEWLINK is only registered by the dplane thread, the main thread
doesn't care about it. So remove the real process of `netlink_link_change()`
for NEWLINK event in main thread.
And move NEWLINK/DELLINK event to the block where the dplane messages
are kept together.
Signed-off-by: anlan_cs <anlan_cs@126.com>
Currently the AIGP is always incremented when a route with the
attribute is advertised. That is incorrect when the nexthop is
unchanged, as is commonly the case in route reflection.
Adjust the AIGP for propagation only when the nexthop is set
to ourselves.
Signed-off-by: Enke Chen <enchen@paloaltonetworks.com>
In this topotest, the route reflector advertises a route with the
aigp attribute to its client, some with the nexthop unchanged and
some with the nexthp changed. Different aigp values are sent to
the clients depending on the nexthop setting.
Signed-off-by: Enke Chen <enchen@paloaltonetworks.com>
The value of 0 is accepted from peers, and can also be set by the
route-map "set aigp-metric igp-metric". For coonsistency, it should
be allowed in "set aigp-metric <value>" as well.
Signed-off-by: Enke Chen <enchen@paloaltonetworks.com>
OAD is treated as an _internal_ BGP peer, and some of the rules (including BGP
attributes) can be relaxed.
Signed-off-by: Donatas Abraitis <donatas@opensourcerouting.org>
For some reasons the Linux kernel associates the ipv6 blackhole of non
default table the lo interface.
> root@r1# ip -6 route show table 100
> root@r1# ip -6 route add unreachable default metric 4278198272 table 100
> root@r1# ip -6 route show table 100
> unreachable default dev lo metric 4278198272 pref medium
As a consequence, the VRF default that owns the lo interface is shown as
the nexthop VRF:
> r1# show ipv6 route table 20
> Table 20:
> K>* ::/0 [255/8192] unreachable (ICMP unreachable) (vrf default), 00:18:12
Do not display the nexthop VRF of a blackhole. It does not make sense
for a blackhole and it was not displayed in the past.
Signed-off-by: Louis Scalbert <louis.scalbert@6wind.com>
a local logger masks the global logger and prevents errors from being
gracefully handled within topotest.py
Signed-off-by: Liam Brady <lbrady@labn.net>
The frrevent system is spitting out this message in bgpd:
20:40:15 mem1-roc-f2-b1-r5-t2-d4 bgpd[13166]: [XETTR-D5MR0][EC 100663316] Attempting to process an I/O event but for fd: 214(8) no thread to handle this!
This is because as each io event is processed, it is possible that a
.events is set to 0. This can leave a situation where we ask
ppoll to handle anything that happens on a fd with a .events of 0,
in this situation ppoll can return POLLERR, which indicates that
something bad has happened on the fd.
Let's set the ppoll fds.fd value to -1 when there are no more
events to be processed. ppoll specifically calls out that
it will just skip this particular one.
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@nvidia.com>
In the processing of nssa, if the number of areas that need to be translated is greater than 0, then abr will be regarded as asbr, and it will be marked (0x3) in the flag of router lsa. When a certain area is set from nssa to a normal area, the areas that need to be translated may be reduced. The asbr should be re-interpreted as abr when the translated area is 0.
Signed-off-by: Shbinging <bingshui@smail.nju.edu.cn>
