When show ip ospf border-routers json (without vrf)
specificed, it leads to crash if there no border-routers
information.
Fix:
Do not free json object if use_vrf flag (means vrf option
is not passed) is not set.
Ticket:#3229017
Issue:3229017
Testing Done:
with fix:
l1# show ip ospf border-routers json
{
}
l1# show ip ospf vrf default border-routers json
{
}
Signed-off-by: Chirag Shah <chirag@nvidia.com>
babeld's `--terminal` option doesn't work because it replaces `stdin`
with `/dev/null`. It seems to me this function can be removed as `frr_run`
handles that in daemon mode.
Signed-off-by: Yuxiang Zhu <vfreex@gmail.com>
In ipv6 vpn, when the global and the local ipv6 address are received,
when re-transmitting the bgp ipv6 update, the nexthop attribute
length must still be 48 bytes.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Guibert <philippe.guibert@6wind.com>
RFC7611 introduces new extended community ACCEPT_OWN and is already
implemented for FRR in the previous PR. However, this PR broke
compatibility about importing VPN routes.
Let's consider the following situation. There are 2 routers and these
routers connects with iBGP session. These routers have two VRF, vrf10
and vrf20, and RD 0:10, 0:20 is configured as the route distinguisher
of vrf10 and vrf20 respectively.
+- R1 --------+ +- R2 --------+
| +---------+ | | +---------+ |
| | VRF10 | | | | VRF10 | |
| | RD 0:10 +--------+ RD 0:10 | |
| +---------+ | | +---------+ |
| +---------+ | | +---------+ |
| | VRF20 +--------+ VRF20 | |
| | RD 0:20 | | | | RD 0:20 | |
| +---------+ | | +---------+ |
+-------------+ +-------------+
In this situation, the VPN routes from R1's VRF10 should be imported to
R2's VRF10 and the VPN routes from R2's VRF10 should be imported to R2's
VRF20. However, the current implementation of ACCEPT_OWN will always
reject routes if the RD of VPN routes are matched with the RD of VRF.
Similar issues will happen in local VRF2VRF route leaks. In such cases,
the route reaked from VRF10 should be imported to VRF20. However, the
current implementation of ACCEPT_OWN will not permit them.
+- R1 ---------------------+
| +------------+ |
| +----v----+ +----v----+ |
| | VRF10 | | VRF20 | |
| | RD 0:10 | | RD 0:10 | |
| +---------+ +---------+ |
+--------------------------+
So, this commit add additional condition in RD match. If the route
doesn't have ACCEPT_OWN extended community, source VRF check will be
skipped.
[RFC7611]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7611
Signed-off-by: Ryoga Saito <ryoga.saito@linecorp.com>
After implementing ACCEPT_OWN extended community, bgpd can't import VPN
routes to the VRFs whose RD is matched with that of VPN routes. This
commit adds new test to check the effect of the next commit.
Signed-off-by: Ryoga Saito <ryoga.saito@linecorp.com>
The input queue limit does not belong under router bgp. This
is a dev escape and should just be removed.
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@nvidia.com>
Consider this scenario:
Lots of peers with a bunch of route information that is changing
fast. One of the peers happens to be really slow for whatever
reason. The way the output queue is filled is that bgpd puts
64 packets at a time and then reschedules itself to send more
in the future. Now suppose that peer has hit it's input Queue
limit and is slow. As such bgp will continue to add data to
the output Queue, irrelevant if the other side is receiving
this data.
Let's limit the Output Queue to the same limit as the Input
Queue. This should prevent bgp eating up large amounts of
memory as stream data when under severe network trauma.
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@nvidia.com>
If we got inside the condition of `vrfp->status == VRF_ACTIVE` then
don't make the same check again.
Found by Coverity Scan (CID 1519760)
Signed-off-by: Rafael Zalamena <rzalamena@opensourcerouting.org>
Don't attempt to dereference `ifp` directly if it might be null: there
is a check right before this usage: `ifp ? ifp->info : NULL`.
In this context it should be safe to assume `ifp` is not NULL because
the only caller of this function checks that for this `ifindex`. For
consistency we'll check for null anyway in case this ever changes (and
with this the coverity scan warning gets silenced).
Found by Coverity Scan (CID 1519776)
Signed-off-by: Rafael Zalamena <rzalamena@opensourcerouting.org>
Testcase: test_pim6_multiple_groups_different_RP_address_p2
was failing because of a bug in framework, Fixed the
bug in this commit.
Signed-off-by: Kuldeep Kashyap <kashyapk@vmware.com>
Multicast pim6 static RP tests are failing
when run in parallel using micronet. There
are APIs to clean mcast traffic before
starting new test but these cleanups
are not needed when socat is used.
Signed-off-by: Kuldeep Kashyap <kashyapk@vmware.com>
Use "(null)" for empty IP address.
One example in `bgp_zebra_send_remote_macip()` to install mac:
Before:
```
2023/01/18 02:09:09 BGP: [SCHS5-AK960] Tx ADD MACIP, VNI 200 MAC 06:6b:7c:db:83:72 IP flags 0x0 seq 0 remote VTEP 88.88.88.88 esi -
```
After:
```
2023/01/18 20:19:57 BGP: [SCHS5-AK960] Tx ADD MACIP, VNI 200 MAC 06:6b:7c:db:83:72 IP (null) flags 0x0 seq 0 remote VTEP 88.88.88.88 esi -
```
Signed-off-by: anlan_cs <vic.lan@pica8.com>
Under really heavily loaded systems this is insufficient. Looking
at the run output we have this:
"2.1.3.22\/32":[
{
"installed":true,
}
],
"2.1.3.23\/32":[
{
"queued":true,
}
],
So after 10 seconds on the micronet system only 30 of the 100 routes are installed.
Give it more time.
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@nvidia.com>
Looks like under heavy load, the test is not giving enough
time to come to steady state. Do this:
a) send more udp packets and for longer
b) Increase time spent waiting
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@nvidia.com>
Don't attempt to encode the pointer address instead pass the pointer
directly so the real contents can be accessed.
(`ri->pref_src` type is `union g_addr *`)
Found by Coverity Scan (CID 1482162)
Signed-off-by: Rafael Zalamena <rzalamena@opensourcerouting.org>
Do extra inotify data structure checks and copy the file name to a stack
buffer making sure it is null byte terminated.
Found by Coverity Scan (CID 1465494)
Signed-off-by: Rafael Zalamena <rzalamena@opensourcerouting.org>
