[Xorp-hackers] RIPng not Accepting routes from Cisco box.

Soucy, Ray rays at maine.edu
Sun Mar 15 17:59:04 PDT 2009


We first suspected this as well.  We added the Link Local address and
didn't see a change.
We also tried creating an import policy for RIPng, no luck here either.

It's very odd.  What we're doing is very simple...  I was hoping it was
just my ignorance on how to configure XORP.

I don't think it's a v6 multicast issue since XORP is seeing the packets
and announcing routes successfully (though that default metric of 0 is
rather irritating).

Is anyone else successfully talking to a Cisco box using RIPng (or any
other non-XORP box)?

I think the next option is on a source level to perhaps make error
messages more useful than "packet discarded".

Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: Pavlin Radoslavov [mailto:pavlin at ICSI.Berkeley.EDU] 
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 3:23 AM
To: Soucy, Ray
Cc: xorp-hackers at icir.org
Subject: Re: [Xorp-hackers] RIPng not Accepting routes from Cisco box.

[A copy of an reply I just sent to xorp-users]

I am not sure this will solve the problem, but you might try to
explictly add the link-local address to the corresponding
ripng/interface/vif and interfaces/interface/vif blocks.

Pavlin

Soucy, Ray <rays at maine.edu> wrote:

> I've been trying to get RIPng working on a XORP 1.6 box.
> 
> From what I can see the XORP box is rejecting routes received by a
Cisco
> box running RIPng.
> 
> I verified that the Cisco router is announcing IPv6 routes through
> RIPng, but on the XORP side when I do a trace I get:
> 
> [ 2009/03/10 11:16:17 TRACE xorp_ripng RIP ] Packet on
> 00000000-49b67bfe-000cb2c3-42150000 from interface eth0 vif eth0
> fe80::219:7ff:fea8:4280/521 604 bytes
> [ 2009/03/10 11:16:17 TRACE xorp_ripng RIP ] Discarding packet
> fe80::219:7ff:fea8:4280/521 604 bytes
> 
> I'm not sure why it would be discarding the packet, can anyone shed
some
> light on what would cause a RIPng packet to be discarded?
> 
> Also, on the Cisco side, I can get the route advertisements from XORP,
> so routing is working in one direction (by the way, routes were going
> out with a metic of 0 so they were being rejected by default, until I
> set a policy to bump the metric to 1).
> 
> Here is debugging from the Cisco side:
> 
> Mar 10 11:06:12: RIPng: Sending multicast update on
GigabitEthernet3/12
> for v6rip
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        src=FE80::219:7FF:FEA8:4280
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        dst=FF02::9 (GigabitEthernet3/12)
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        sport=521, dport=521, length=612
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        command=2, version=1, mbz=0, #rte=30
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=1, prefix=2610:48::28/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=1, prefix=2610:48:402::8/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=1, prefix=2610:48:402::4/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48::24/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48::2C/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48:0:800::1/128
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48:100:800::/54
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48::34/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:800::/64
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:801::/64
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:802::/64
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:803::/64
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:804::/64
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:805::/64
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48::C/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48::30/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:0:1000::1/128
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48::10/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::8/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::18/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:100:1C00::/54
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::14/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:0:C00::1/128
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:0:400::1/128
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::4/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::20/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:1::4/126
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:100:400::/54
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=120, metric=4, prefix=::/0
> Mar 10 11:06:12:        tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::38/126
> 
> I have no import policy set (only export).  Essentially the
> configuration is identical to a working RIP configuration.
> 
> RIPng configuration:
> 
>     interface eth0 {
>         vif eth0 {
>             address 2610:48:402::6 {
>                 advertise-default-route: false
>             }
>         }
>     }
>     export: "RIPng-export"
> 
> RIPng-export policy:
> 
>     term 100 {
>         from {
>             protocol: "connected"
>             network6-list: "RIPng-export"
>         }
>         then {
>             metric: 1
>         }
>     }
> 
> RIPng-export list:
> 
>     network 2610:48:402:1::/64
> 
> Interface eth0:
> 
>     description: "WAN"
>     vif eth0 {
>         address 169.244.10.50 {
>             prefix-length: 30
>         }
>         address 2610:48:402::6 {
>             prefix-length: 126
>         }
>     }
> 
> Interface eth1:
> 
>     description: "LAN"
>     vif eth1 {
>         address 169.244.81.225 {
>             prefix-length: 27
>         }
>         address 2610:48:402:1::1 {
>             prefix-length: 64
>         }
>     }
> 
> Do I need an import policy for RIPng?
> 
> Ray Soucy
> Communications Specialist
> 
> +1 (207) 561-3526
> 
> Communications and Network Services
> 
> University of Maine System
> http://www.maine.edu/
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xorp-hackers mailing list
> Xorp-hackers at icir.org
> http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers



More information about the Xorp-hackers mailing list