From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Mon Dec 5 23:31:43 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 23:31:43 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem Message-ID: Hi, XORP hackers, This is Frank. I am new to XORP and plan to look into its multicast routing implementation. I got the current 1.8.4 source code and did the following on my pc running Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. 1. scons 2. sudo scons install 3. Followed the "Getting Started" guide to prepare the system to run xorp. sudo groupadd xorp sudo usermod -a -G xorp root 4. edit a simple /etc/xorp/config.boot as below $ cat /etc/xorp/config.boot interfaces { } rtrmgr { config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" } 5. sudo /usr/local/xorp/sbin/xorp_rtrmgr -d -P /var/run/xorp.pid -l /var/log/xorp -b /etc/xorp/config.boot I noticed that the xorp_rtrmgr daemon was running after step 5 is done. 6. chmod 775 /var/tmp/xrl.* chown root:xorp /var/tmp/xrl.* 7. /usr/local/xorp/sbin/xorpsh but got the following errors. ERROR: Failed chown on path: /var/tmp/xrl.iz5lxV error: Operation not permitted ERROR: Failed chown on path: /var/tmp/xrl.cw43Rc error: Operation not permitted [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.420771 WARNING xorpsh RTRMGR ] [Operational Command File: /usr/local/xorp/share/xorp/templates/misc.cmds line 29]: Executable file not found: traceroute [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.432103 WARNING xorpsh LIBXORP ] read error: _fd: 25 offset: 0 total-len: 4 error: Connection refused [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.532117 WARNING xorpsh LIBXORP ] read error: _fd: 25 offset: 0 total-len: 4 error: Connection refused [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.632228 WARNING xorpsh LIBXORP ] read error: _fd: 25 offset: 0 total-len: 4 error: Connection refused Any hints? I think that I created the necessary group "xorp" and added the user "root" to that group. Also the normal user "feng" is added to the group "xorp". "xorpsh" is launched as the normal user. " cat /etc/group | grep xorp xorp:x:1001:feng,root " Thanks a lot for any help!! Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111205/a15b84e5/attachment.html From igorm at etf.rs Tue Dec 6 00:06:19 2011 From: igorm at etf.rs (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Igor_Maravi=E6?=) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 09:06:19 +0100 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Try sudo chmod -R 775 /var/tmp sudo chown -R root:xorp /var/tmp BR Igor PS. The easier way to install Xorp would be with xorp_install script From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 11:14:51 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:14:51 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for the kind help! It still has the same error even after I switched to use "xorp_install.bash" script. My bad in my earlier email not clearly saying the usage of "sudo" in "chmod" and "chown". I did run "chmod" and "chown" as super user. otherwise, the command will just fail. I tried to use xorp_install script and found that it has some extra info. It tried to add the user "lanforge" to the group "xorp". I didn't see that it was documented anywhere in xorp.net. So is it really necessary? I also saw the script tried to add the user "xorp" to the root group. Is that necessary as well? " $ ps -ef|grep xorp feng 15982 1 0 08:10 ? 00:00:01 gvim xorp_install.bash root 16561 1 0 08:39 pts/0 00:00:00 xorp_fea root 16564 1 0 08:39 ? 00:00:00 /usr/local/xorp/sbin/xorp_rtrmgr -d -P /var/run/xorp.pid -l /var/log/xorp -b /etc/xorp/config.boot feng 16566 21900 0 08:39 pts/0 00:00:00 grep --color=auto xorp $ ls -l /var/tmp total 0 srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.AErxLy srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.f2DBgj srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.FFLIL3 srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.iE6G21 srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.JggugO srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.NZn6th srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.pS5ugj srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.vo6tL3 srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.XE8zLy srw-rw-r-- 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.Y7kGgO $ sudo chmod 775 /var/tmp/xrl.* $ sudo chown root:xorp /var/tmp/xrl.* $ ls -l /var/tmp/ total 0 srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.AErxLy srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.f2DBgj srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.FFLIL3 srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.iE6G21 srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.JggugO srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.NZn6th srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.pS5ugj srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.vo6tL3 srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.XE8zLy srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 xrl.Y7kGgO $ xorpsh -h Usage: xorpsh [options] Options: -c Specify command(s) to execute -e Exit immediately if cannot connect to the rtrmgr -h Display this information -v Print verbose information -t Specify templates directory Defaults: Templates directory := /usr/local/xorp/share/xorp/templates Print verbose information := false $xorpsh .... many errors... [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691433 ERROR xorpsh:16580 XRL libxipc/xrl_router.cc:478 lookup_sender ] Could not create XrlPFSender for protocol = "unix" address = ":var:tmp:xrl.NZn6th" [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691746 ERROR xorpsh:16580 LIBCOMM libcomm/comm_user.c:886 comm_connect_unix ] Error connecting to unix socket. Path: /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. Error: Permission deniedKilled " I checked the unix socket file /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. " $ ls -l /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 $ cat /etc/group | grep xorp root:x:0:xorp xorp:x:1001:feng,root,xorp,lanforge feng at feng-desktop:~$ " Anyway, I figured out a possible way to get xorp to work.... Instead of running xorpsh as a normal user "feng", I tried to run it as a normal user "xorp" and then it gave me the CLI interfaces.. " $ su xorp Password: $ pwd /usr/local/xorp $ ./sbin/xorpsh Welcome to XORP on desktop xorp at desktop> ? Possible completions: configure Switch to configuration mode exit Exit this command session help Provide help with commands ping Ping a hostname or IP address ping6 Ping an IPv6 hostname or IPv6 address quit Quit this command session show Display information about the system traceroute Trace the IP route to a hostname or IP address traceroute6 Trace the IPv6 route to a hostname or IPv6 address " 2011/12/6 Igor Maravi? > Try > > sudo chmod -R 775 /var/tmp > sudo chown -R root:xorp /var/tmp > > BR > Igor > > PS. The easier way to install Xorp would be with xorp_install script > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111206/08e5ae9b/attachment.html From greearb at candelatech.com Tue Dec 6 11:19:05 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:19:05 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EDE6AA9.7080702@candelatech.com> On 12/06/2011 11:14 AM, frank hu wrote: > > Thanks for the kind help! > It still has the same error even after I switched to use "xorp_install.bash" script. My bad in my earlier email not clearly saying the usage of "sudo" in > "chmod" and "chown". I did run "chmod" and "chown" as super user. otherwise, the command will just fail. > I tried to use xorp_install script and found that it has some extra info. It tried to add the user "lanforge" to the group "xorp". I didn't see that it was > documented anywhere in xorp.net . So is it really necessary? I also saw the script tried to add the user "xorp" to the root group. Is that > necessary as well? The lanforge user is not needed by general users...but the xorp user and xorp group is. > $xorpsh > .... many errors... > [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691433 ERROR xorpsh:16580 XRL libxipc/xrl_router.cc:478 lookup_sender ] Could not create XrlPFSender for protocol = "unix" address = > ":var:tmp:xrl.NZn6th" > [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691746 ERROR xorpsh:16580 LIBCOMM libcomm/comm_user.c:886 comm_connect_unix ] Error connecting to unix socket. Path: > /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. Error: Permission deniedKilled > " > I checked the unix socket file /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. > " > $ ls -l /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > $ cat /etc/group | grep xorp > root:x:0:xorp > xorp:x:1001:feng,root,xorp,lanforge > feng at feng-desktop:~$ > " > > Anyway, I figured out a possible way to get xorp to work.... Instead of running xorpsh as a normal user "feng", I tried to run it as a normal user "xorp" and > then it gave me the CLI interfaces.. Yes. Whatever runs xorpsh must be in the xorp group and have permissions to read/write in the /var/tmp/ directory. You could try adding 'feng' to the xorp group... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From fengliang.hu at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 11:41:19 2011 From: fengliang.hu at gmail.com (Fengliang Hu) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:41:19 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: <4EDE6AA9.7080702@candelatech.com> References: <4EDE6AA9.7080702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ben, Thanks a lot for looking into the issue that I ran into. From the Linux command output from "cat /etc/group", you can see that the normal user "feng" is already added to the group "xorp". " > $ ls -l /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > $ cat /etc/group | grep xorp > root:x:0:xorp > xorp:x:1001:feng,root,xorp, lanforge > " > > Anyway, I figured out a possible way to get xorp to work.... Instead of running xorpsh as a normal user "feng", I tried to run it as a normal user "xorp" and > then it gave me the CLI interfaces.. Yes. Whatever runs xorpsh must be in the xorp group and have permissions to read/write in the /var/tmp/ directory. You could try adding 'feng' to the xorp group... " Thanks, Frank On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 12/06/2011 11:14 AM, frank hu wrote: > > > > Thanks for the kind help! > > It still has the same error even after I switched to use > "xorp_install.bash" script. My bad in my earlier email not clearly saying > the usage of "sudo" in > > "chmod" and "chown". I did run "chmod" and "chown" as super user. > otherwise, the command will just fail. > > I tried to use xorp_install script and found that it has some extra > info. It tried to add the user "lanforge" to the group "xorp". I didn't see > that it was > > documented anywhere in xorp.net . So is it really > necessary? I also saw the script tried to add the user "xorp" to the root > group. Is that > > necessary as well? > > The lanforge user is not needed by general users...but the xorp user and > xorp group is. > > > $xorpsh > > .... many errors... > > [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691433 ERROR xorpsh:16580 XRL > libxipc/xrl_router.cc:478 lookup_sender ] Could not create XrlPFSender for > protocol = "unix" address = > > ":var:tmp:xrl.NZn6th" > > [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691746 ERROR xorpsh:16580 LIBCOMM > libcomm/comm_user.c:886 comm_connect_unix ] Error connecting to unix > socket. Path: > > /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. Error: Permission deniedKilled > > " > > I checked the unix socket file /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. > > " > > $ ls -l /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > > srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > > $ cat /etc/group | grep xorp > > root:x:0:xorp > > xorp:x:1001:feng,root,xorp,lanforge > > " > > > > Anyway, I figured out a possible way to get xorp to work.... Instead of > running xorpsh as a normal user "feng", I tried to run it as a normal user > "xorp" and > > then it gave me the CLI interfaces.. > > Yes. Whatever runs xorpsh must be in the xorp group and have permissions > to read/write > in the /var/tmp/ directory. You could try adding 'feng' to the xorp > group... > > Thanks, > Ben > > > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111206/ca700fab/attachment-0001.html From greearb at candelatech.com Tue Dec 6 11:49:47 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:49:47 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: References: <4EDE6AA9.7080702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: <4EDE71DB.3060900@candelatech.com> On 12/06/2011 11:41 AM, Fengliang Hu wrote: > Hi, Ben, > > Thanks a lot for looking into the issue that I ran into. From the Linux command output from "cat /etc/group", you can see that the normal user "feng" is already > added to the group "xorp". Can you manually modify files in /var/tmp with the user feng? You probably have to re-login after adding your user to a group. Thanks, Ben > > " > > $ ls -l /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > > srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > > $ cat /etc/group | grep xorp > > root:x:0:xorp > > xorp:x:1001:feng,root,xorp, > lanforge > > " > > > > Anyway, I figured out a possible way to get xorp to work.... Instead of running xorpsh as a normal user "feng", I tried to run it as a normal user "xorp" and > > then it gave me the CLI interfaces.. > > Yes. Whatever runs xorpsh must be in the xorp group and have permissions to read/write > in the /var/tmp/ directory. You could try adding 'feng' to the xorp group... > " > > Thanks, > Frank > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Ben Greear > wrote: > > On 12/06/2011 11:14 AM, frank hu wrote: > > > > Thanks for the kind help! > > It still has the same error even after I switched to use "xorp_install.bash" script. My bad in my earlier email not clearly saying the usage of "sudo" in > > "chmod" and "chown". I did run "chmod" and "chown" as super user. otherwise, the command will just fail. > > I tried to use xorp_install script and found that it has some extra info. It tried to add the user "lanforge" to the group "xorp". I didn't see that it was > > documented anywhere in xorp.net . So is it really necessary? I also saw the script tried to add the user "xorp" to > the root group. Is that > > necessary as well? > > The lanforge user is not needed by general users...but the xorp user and xorp group is. > > > $xorpsh > > .... many errors... > > [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691433 ERROR xorpsh:16580 XRL libxipc/xrl_router.cc:478 lookup_sender ] Could not create XrlPFSender for protocol = "unix" address = > > ":var:tmp:xrl.NZn6th" > > [ 2011/12/06 08:44:04.691746 ERROR xorpsh:16580 LIBCOMM libcomm/comm_user.c:886 comm_connect_unix ] Error connecting to unix socket. Path: > > /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. Error: Permission deniedKilled > > " > > I checked the unix socket file /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21. > > " > > $ ls -l /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > > srwxrwxr-x 1 root xorp 0 2011-12-06 08:39 /var/tmp/xrl.iE6G21 > > $ cat /etc/group | grep xorp > > root:x:0:xorp > > xorp:x:1001:feng,root,xorp,lanforge > > " > > > > Anyway, I figured out a possible way to get xorp to work.... Instead of running xorpsh as a normal user "feng", I tried to run it as a normal user "xorp" and > > then it gave me the CLI interfaces.. > > Yes. Whatever runs xorpsh must be in the xorp group and have permissions to read/write > in the /var/tmp/ directory. You could try adding 'feng' to the xorp group... > > Thanks, > Ben > > > > -- > Ben Greear > > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers > > -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 13:15:00 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:15:00 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux Message-ID: Hi, sorry for asking some silly questions again. I am still battling to get xorp to work for multicast routing. I hope that this is just because I am not familar with xorp usage. On the Ubuntu system, I created 2 VLAN interfaces using "vconfig", say vlan800 and vlan300 on top of the real physical interface eth0. They have IPv4 addresses assigned to them. To enable IGMP and PIM-SM4 over it set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 version 2 set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan300 vif vlan300 disable false when I commit, I got the following error: "Missing mandatory configuration node "$(@.targetname)" required by node "protocols igmp". Then I tweaked the configuration above o "...interface eth0 vif vlan800" or "...interface eth0 vif vlan300". I found that that configuration is accepted. However, after I commit it, I don't see the PIM-v2 hello messages were sent out. Then I researched xorp documentation a bit and found that it provided CLIs to create VLAN interfaces. User manual shows the sample configuration: protocols { igmp { interface dc0 { vif dc0 { /* version: 2 */ /* enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false */ /* query-interval: 125 */ /* query-last-member-interval: 1 */ /* query-response-interval: 10 */ /* robust-count: 2 */ } } } So I should be able to just reference the VLAN interfaces vlan800 and vlan300 (which are recognized by ifconfig on my Linux)... Am I talking sense here? Thanks for any help!! Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111206/12ec2ed7/attachment.html From rps at maine.edu Tue Dec 6 13:45:40 2011 From: rps at maine.edu (Ray Soucy) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:45:40 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Writing an RC script that cleans up file permissions might help, example: http://soucy.org/xorp/xorp-1.7-pre/rc.xorp Also, of interest (though out of date) might be the INSTALL notes for Ubuntu LTS if you back up a directory. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:31 AM, frank hu wrote: > Hi, XORP hackers, > > This is Frank. I am new to XORP and plan to look into its multicast routing > implementation. I got the current 1.8.4 source code and did the following on > my pc running Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. > > 1. scons > > 2. sudo scons install > > 3. Followed the "Getting Started" guide to prepare the system to run xorp. > sudo groupadd xorp > sudo usermod -a -G xorp root > > 4. edit a simple /etc/xorp/config.boot as below > $ cat /etc/xorp/config.boot > interfaces { > } > rtrmgr { > ??? config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" > } > 5. sudo /usr/local/xorp/sbin/xorp_rtrmgr -d -P /var/run/xorp.pid -l > /var/log/xorp -b /etc/xorp/config.boot > I noticed that the xorp_rtrmgr daemon was running after step 5 is done. > > 6.???? chmod 775 /var/tmp/xrl.* > ??? chown root:xorp /var/tmp/xrl.* > 7. /usr/local/xorp/sbin/xorpsh but got the following errors. > ERROR: Failed chown on path: /var/tmp/xrl.iz5lxV error: Operation not > permitted > ERROR: Failed chown on path: /var/tmp/xrl.cw43Rc error: Operation not > permitted > [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.420771 WARNING xorpsh RTRMGR ] [Operational Command > File: /usr/local/xorp/share/xorp/templates/misc.cmds line 29]: Executable > file not found: traceroute > [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.432103 WARNING xorpsh LIBXORP ] read error: _fd: 25 > offset: 0? total-len: 4 error: Connection refused > [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.532117 WARNING xorpsh LIBXORP ] read error: _fd: 25 > offset: 0? total-len: 4 error: Connection refused > [ 2011/12/05 22:28:15.632228 WARNING xorpsh LIBXORP ] read error: _fd: 25 > offset: 0? total-len: 4 error: Connection refused > Any hints? I think that I created the necessary group "xorp" and added the > user "root" to that group. Also the normal user "feng" is added to the group > "xorp". "xorpsh" is launched as the normal user. > > " > cat /etc/group | grep xorp > xorp:x:1001:feng,root > " > > Thanks a lot for any help!! > > Frank > > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers > -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/ From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 13:46:31 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:46:31 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XORP beginner question: xorpsh has some connect problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Igor. >From what I can see, after I started the process "xorp_rtrmgr", a few xrl.* files would be created. I think that xorpsh did try to create a couple of more xrl.* files. And I noticed something weird... once I launched xorpsh, I found that the socket files "xrl.XYZABC" will become "xrl.XYZABC=". And if I stopped "xorpsh", the socket files will go back to the previous names "xrl.XYZABC". Is this something expected? Thanks a lot for the help! 2011/12/6 Igor Maravi? > > It still has the same error even after I switched to use > "xorp_install.bash" > > script. My bad in my earlier email not clearly saying the usage of > "sudo" in > > "chmod" and "chown". I did run "chmod" and "chown" as super user. > otherwise, > > the command will just fail. > > The point was not on "sudo", but on "-R" option. > To run xorpsh, xorp user should have the permission to create files in > /var/tmp > There are no xrl files in /var/tmp, they are created by xorpsh. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111206/fe74eadb/attachment.html From rps at maine.edu Wed Dec 7 07:19:45 2011 From: rps at maine.edu (Ray Soucy) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 10:19:45 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Define any VLAN interface as you would a physical interface in your interfaces block. e.g. ----8<---- interfaces { interface eth0 { disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif eth0 { disable: false } } interface "vlan300" { disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif "vlan300" { disable: false address 192.0.3.1 { prefix-length: 24 disable: false } } } interface "vlan800" { disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif "vlan800" { disable: false address 192.0.8.1 { prefix-length: 24 disable: false } } } } ----8<---- And don't forget plumbing block: ----8<---- plumbing { mfea4 { disable: false interface "vlan300" { vif "vlan300" { disable: false } } interface "vlan800" { vif "vlan800" { disable: false } } interface "register_vif" { vif "register_vif" { disable: false } } } } ----8<---- On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:15 PM, frank hu wrote: > Hi, > > sorry for asking?some silly questions?again. I am still battling to get xorp > to work for multicast routing. I hope that this is just because I am not > familar with xorp usage. > > On the Ubuntu system, I created?2 VLAN interfaces using "vconfig", say > vlan800 and vlan300 on top of the real physical interface eth0.?They have > IPv4 addresses assigned to them. > > To enable IGMP and PIM-SM4 over it > > set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false > set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 version 2 > > set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false > set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan300 vif vlan300 disable false > > when I commit, I got the following error: "Missing mandatory configuration > node "$(@.targetname)" required by node "protocols igmp". > > Then I tweaked the configuration above o "...interface eth0 vif vlan800" or > "...interface eth0 vif vlan300". I found that that configuration is > accepted. However, after I commit it, I don't see the PIM-v2 hello messages > were sent out. > > Then I researched xorp documentation a bit and found that it provided CLIs > to create VLAN interfaces. > > User manual shows the sample configuration: > protocols { > ?? igmp { > ???? interface dc0 { > ??????? vif dc0 { > ????????? /* version: 2 */ > ????????? /* enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false */ > ????????? /* query-interval: 125 */ > ????????? /* query-last-member-interval: 1 */ > ????????? /* query-response-interval: 10 */ > ????????? /* robust-count: 2 */ > ???? } > ?? } > } > > So I should be able to just reference the VLAN interfaces vlan800 and > vlan300 (which are recognized by ifconfig on my Linux)... > > Am I talking sense here? > > Thanks for any help!! > > Frank > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers > -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/ From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 14:48:16 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 14:48:16 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Ray. I will be trying your suggestions. Before that, I found a weird PIM interface problem... I tried to enable PIM over interface VLAN300 and VLAN800. However, one is shown by XORP as UP and the other is "DISABLED". I found that if I don't configure DR-priority for VLAN300, it would be shown as "DOWN" (but not DISABLED). " # show protocols { ospf4 { router-id: 1.1.1.1 area 0.0.0.0 { interface eth0 { vif eth0 } interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { address 172.15.3.212 { } } } } } pimsm4 { interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { dr-priority: 32 } } interface vlan800 { vif vlan800 { dr-priority: 3 } } bootstrap { } } } interfaces { interface eth0 { vif eth0 { } default-system-config { } } interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { address 172.15.3.212 { prefix-length: 24 } } default-system-config { } } interface vlan800 { vif vlan800 { address 172.15.80.212 { prefix-length: 24 multicast-capable: true } } default-system-config { } } } rtrmgr { config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" } [edit] --More-- (END) xorp at desktop# run show pim interface Interface State Mode V PIMstate Priority DRaddr Neighbors eth0 DISABLED Sparse 2 DR 1 0.0.0.0 0 vlan300 UP Sparse 2 DR 32 172.15.3.212 2 vlan800 DISABLED Sparse 2 DR 3 172.15.80.212 0 xorp at desktop# run show interfaces eth0/eth0: Flags: mtu 1500 speed 1 Gbps physical index 2 ether 0:1c:c4:ae:a6:6a vlan300/vlan300: Flags: mtu 1500 speed 1 Gbps type: VLAN parent interface: eth0 vid: 300 inet 172.15.3.212 subnet 172.15.3.0/24 broadcast 172.15.3.255 physical index 10 ether 0:1c:c4:ae:a6:6a vlan800/vlan800: Flags: mtu 1500 speed 1 Gbps type: VLAN parent interface: eth0 vid: 800 inet 172.15.80.212 subnet 172.15.80.0/24 broadcast 172.15.80.255 physical index 9 ether 0:1c:c4:ae:a6:6a " It seems quite weird to me. Also based on the XORP user manual, I don't need to set the address for VLAN300 or VLAN800 if I set "default-system-configuration". But I found that if I don't set the IP address, the VLAN interface will be shown as "DOWN" or "disabled" even PIM still configure them with DR-priorities. Similar comments on enable OSPF over an interface... I got that to work, but I figured that I HAD to configure the address to use for the interface over which OSPF is configured. This is really not flexible -- what if the user changes the IP address on an interface? The user has to update the OSPF configuration to match the new IP address? Being familiar with the Cisco routing CLI, these caveats seem quite counter-intuitive... Could anybody help me understand if XORP was deployed outside the research/academia community? Thanks a lot for the feedback!! Frank On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Ray Soucy wrote: > Define any VLAN interface as you would a physical interface in your > interfaces block. > > e.g. > > ----8<---- > interfaces { > interface eth0 { > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif eth0 { > disable: false > } > } > interface "vlan300" { > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif "vlan300" { > disable: false > address 192.0.3.1 { > prefix-length: 24 > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "vlan800" { > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif "vlan800" { > disable: false > address 192.0.8.1 { > prefix-length: 24 > disable: false > } > } > } > } > > ----8<---- > > And don't forget plumbing block: > > ----8<---- > > plumbing { > mfea4 { > disable: false > interface "vlan300" { > vif "vlan300" { > disable: false > } > } > interface "vlan800" { > vif "vlan800" { > disable: false > } > } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > disable: false > } > } > } > } > > ----8<---- > > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:15 PM, frank hu wrote: > > Hi, > > > > sorry for asking some silly questions again. I am still battling to get > xorp > > to work for multicast routing. I hope that this is just because I am not > > familar with xorp usage. > > > > On the Ubuntu system, I created 2 VLAN interfaces using "vconfig", say > > vlan800 and vlan300 on top of the real physical interface eth0. They have > > IPv4 addresses assigned to them. > > > > To enable IGMP and PIM-SM4 over it > > > > set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false > > set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 version 2 > > > > set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false > > set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan300 vif vlan300 disable false > > > > when I commit, I got the following error: "Missing mandatory > configuration > > node "$(@.targetname)" required by node "protocols igmp". > > > > Then I tweaked the configuration above o "...interface eth0 vif vlan800" > or > > "...interface eth0 vif vlan300". I found that that configuration is > > accepted. However, after I commit it, I don't see the PIM-v2 hello > messages > > were sent out. > > > > Then I researched xorp documentation a bit and found that it provided > CLIs > > to create VLAN interfaces. > > > > User manual shows the sample configuration: > > protocols { > > igmp { > > interface dc0 { > > vif dc0 { > > /* version: 2 */ > > /* enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false */ > > /* query-interval: 125 */ > > /* query-last-member-interval: 1 */ > > /* query-response-interval: 10 */ > > /* robust-count: 2 */ > > } > > } > > } > > > > So I should be able to just reference the VLAN interfaces vlan800 and > > vlan300 (which are recognized by ifconfig on my Linux)... > > > > Am I talking sense here? > > > > Thanks for any help!! > > > > Frank > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xorp-hackers mailing list > > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers > > > > > > -- > Ray Soucy > > Epic Communications Specialist > > Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 > > Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System > http://www.networkmaine.net/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111207/04eda6f1/attachment.html From rps at maine.edu Wed Dec 7 19:13:18 2011 From: rps at maine.edu (Ray Soucy) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 22:13:18 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I haven't had good luck with default-system-configuration and VLAN interfaces; especially where PIM is concerned. You likely need to specify the addresses manually (in addition to creating the VLAN interfaces manually with vconfig). The XORP handling of VLANs has never been great; recent patches have been made to try an improve it; but it's still has work to be done before it's up to user expectations. On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 5:48 PM, frank hu wrote: > Thanks Ray. I will be trying your suggestions. > > Before that, I found a weird PIM interface problem... I tried to enable PIM > over interface VLAN300 and VLAN800. However, one is shown by XORP as UP and > the other is "DISABLED". I found that if I don't configure DR-priority for > VLAN300, it would be shown as "DOWN" (but not DISABLED). > > " > # show > ??? protocols { > ??????? ospf4 { > ??????????? router-id: 1.1.1.1 > ??????????? area 0.0.0.0 { > ??????????????? interface eth0 { > ??????????????????? vif eth0 > ??????????????? } > ??????????????? interface vlan300 { > ??????????????????? vif vlan300 { > ??????????????????????? address 172.15.3.212 { > ??????????????????????? } > ??????????????????? } > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??????? pimsm4 { > ??????????? interface vlan300 { > ??????????????? vif vlan300 { > ??????????????????? dr-priority: 32 > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????????? interface vlan800 { > ??????????????? vif vlan800 { > ??????????????????? dr-priority: 3 > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????????? bootstrap { > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??? } > ??? interfaces { > ??????? interface eth0 { > ??????????? vif eth0 { > ??????????? } > ??????????? default-system-config { > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??????? interface vlan300 { > ??????????? vif vlan300 { > ??????????????? address 172.15.3.212 { > ??????????????????? prefix-length: 24 > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????????? default-system-config { > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??????? interface vlan800 { > ??????????? vif vlan800 { > ??????????????? address 172.15.80.212 { > ??????????????????? prefix-length: 24 > ??????????????????? multicast-capable: true > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????????? default-system-config { > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??? } > ??? rtrmgr { > ??????? config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" > ??? } > [edit] > ?--More-- (END) > xorp at desktop# run show pim interface > Interface??? State??? Mode?? V PIMstate Priority DRaddr????????? Neighbors > eth0???????? DISABLED Sparse 2 DR????????????? 1 0.0.0.0???????????????? 0 > vlan300????? UP?????? Sparse 2 DR???????????? 32 172.15.3.212??????????? 2 > vlan800????? DISABLED Sparse 2 DR????????????? 3 172.15.80.212?????????? 0 > xorp at desktop# run show interfaces > eth0/eth0: Flags: mtu 1500 speed 1 Gbps > ??????? physical index 2 > ??????? ether 0:1c:c4:ae:a6:6a > vlan300/vlan300: Flags: mtu 1500 speed 1 Gbps > ??????? type: VLAN parent interface: eth0 vid: 300 > ??????? inet 172.15.3.212 subnet MailScanner has detected a possible fraud > attempt from "172.15.3.0" claiming to be 172.15.3.0/24 broadcast > 172.15.3.255 > ??????? physical index 10 > ??????? ether 0:1c:c4:ae:a6:6a > vlan800/vlan800: Flags: mtu 1500 speed 1 Gbps > ??????? type: VLAN parent interface: eth0 vid: 800 > ??????? inet 172.15.80.212 subnet MailScanner has detected a possible fraud > attempt from "172.15.80.0" claiming to be 172.15.80.0/24 broadcast > 172.15.80.255 > ??????? physical index 9 > ??????? ether 0:1c:c4:ae:a6:6a > > " > It seems quite weird to me. > > Also based on the XORP user manual, I don't need to set the address for > VLAN300 or VLAN800 if I set "default-system-configuration". But I found that > if I don't set the IP address, the VLAN interface will be shown as "DOWN" or > "disabled" even PIM still configure them with DR-priorities. > > Similar comments on enable OSPF over an interface... I got that to work, but > I figured that I HAD to configure the address to use for the interface over > which OSPF is configured. This is really not flexible -- what if the user > changes the IP address on an interface? The user has to update the OSPF > configuration to match the new IP address? > > Being familiar with the Cisco routing CLI, these caveats seem quite > counter-intuitive... Could anybody help me understand if XORP was?deployed > outside the research/academia community? > > Thanks a lot for the feedback!! > > Frank > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Ray Soucy wrote: >> >> Define any VLAN interface as you would a physical interface in your >> interfaces block. >> >> e.g. >> >> ----8<---- >> interfaces { >> ?interface eth0 { >> ? ?disable: false >> ? ?discard: false >> ? ?unreachable: false >> ? ?management: false >> ? ?vif eth0 { >> ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ?} >> ?} >> ?interface "vlan300" { >> ? ?disable: false >> ? ?discard: false >> ? ?unreachable: false >> ? ?management: false >> ? ?vif "vlan300" { >> ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ?address 192.0.3.1 { >> ? ? ? ? ?prefix-length: 24 >> ? ? ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ?} >> ? ?} >> ?} >> ?interface "vlan800" { >> ? ?disable: false >> ? ?discard: false >> ? ?unreachable: false >> ? ?management: false >> ? ?vif "vlan800" { >> ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ?address 192.0.8.1 { >> ? ? ? ? ?prefix-length: 24 >> ? ? ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ?} >> ? ?} >> ?} >> } >> >> ----8<---- >> >> And don't forget plumbing block: >> >> ----8<---- >> >> plumbing { >> ? ?mfea4 { >> ? ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ? ?interface "vlan300" { >> ? ? ? ? ? ?vif "vlan300" { >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ? ? ? ?} >> ? ? ? ?} >> ? ? ? ?interface "vlan800" { >> ? ? ? ? ? ?vif "vlan800" { >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ? ? ? ?} >> ? ? ? ?} >> ? ? ? ?interface "register_vif" { >> ? ? ? ? ? ?vif "register_vif" { >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?disable: false >> ? ? ? ? ? ?} >> ? ? ? ?} >> ? ?} >> } >> >> ----8<---- >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:15 PM, frank hu wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > sorry for asking?some silly questions?again. I am still battling to get >> > xorp >> > to work for multicast routing. I hope that this is just because I am not >> > familar with xorp usage. >> > >> > On the Ubuntu system, I created?2 VLAN interfaces using "vconfig", say >> > vlan800 and vlan300 on top of the real physical interface eth0.?They >> > have >> > IPv4 addresses assigned to them. >> > >> > To enable IGMP and PIM-SM4 over it >> > >> > set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false >> > set protocols igmp interface vlan800 vif vlan800 version 2 >> > >> > set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan800 vif vlan800 disable false >> > set protocols pimsm4 interface vlan300 vif vlan300 disable false >> > >> > when I commit, I got the following error: "Missing mandatory >> > configuration >> > node "$(@.targetname)" required by node "protocols igmp". >> > >> > Then I tweaked the configuration above o "...interface eth0 vif vlan800" >> > or >> > "...interface eth0 vif vlan300". I found that that configuration is >> > accepted. However, after I commit it, I don't see the PIM-v2 hello >> > messages >> > were sent out. >> > >> > Then I researched xorp documentation a bit and found that it provided >> > CLIs >> > to create VLAN interfaces. >> > >> > User manual shows the sample configuration: >> > protocols { >> > ?? igmp { >> > ???? interface dc0 { >> > ??????? vif dc0 { >> > ????????? /* version: 2 */ >> > ????????? /* enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false */ >> > ????????? /* query-interval: 125 */ >> > ????????? /* query-last-member-interval: 1 */ >> > ????????? /* query-response-interval: 10 */ >> > ????????? /* robust-count: 2 */ >> > ???? } >> > ?? } >> > } >> > >> > So I should be able to just reference the VLAN interfaces vlan800 and >> > vlan300 (which are recognized by ifconfig on my Linux)... >> > >> > Am I talking sense here? >> > >> > Thanks for any help!! >> > >> > Frank >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Xorp-hackers mailing list >> > Xorp-hackers at icir.org >> > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Ray Soucy >> >> Epic Communications Specialist >> >> Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 >> >> Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System >> http://www.networkmaine.net/ > > -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/ From greearb at candelatech.com Wed Dec 7 21:03:08 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:03:08 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> On 12/07/2011 07:13 PM, Ray Soucy wrote: > I haven't had good luck with default-system-configuration and VLAN > interfaces; especially where PIM is concerned. > > You likely need to specify the addresses manually (in addition to > creating the VLAN interfaces manually with vconfig). > > The XORP handling of VLANs has never been great; recent patches have > been made to try an improve it; but it's still has work to be done > before it's up to user expectations. I don't ever test using default-system-config, but if you find problems when using config from within Xorp, please report the bug. In general, I'd suggest you drive all changes through xorp..ie, tell it to set the IP instead of hoping it will figure things out when you set it outside of xorp. You can script xorpsh using multiple -c 'command 1' -c 'command 2' .... It's not exactly user-friendly, but it works (for my uses, at least). And as always, patches are welcome, as are detailed bug reports with xorp logs, OS & kernel version, etc. Please submit such bug reports to the bugzilla so we don't loose track of it. >> Being familiar with the Cisco routing CLI, these caveats seem quite >> counter-intuitive... Could anybody help me understand if XORP was deployed >> outside the research/academia community? Probably not so much. We use it in our LANforge product, but we drive xorp from our program (which builds networks with a GUI) using programatically created xorpsh commands and xorp config files. Those code paths are pretty well tested, but I'm certain bugs remain to be uncovered. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 21:58:49 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 21:58:49 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ben and Ray, Thanks a lot for the kind help and open feedback. I am investigating putting xorp as the multicast routing engine for our network device running Linux. From the CLIs I can see that it provides the set of multicast routing features that I am interested in. The reason that xorp seems attractive to me is that it was listed as one test implementations in RFC 4602. However the deficiency in the VLAN interfaces support is a big no-no on Linux based software routers. Thanks again!! Frank On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 12/07/2011 07:13 PM, Ray Soucy wrote: > >> I haven't had good luck with default-system-configuration and VLAN >> interfaces; especially where PIM is concerned. >> >> You likely need to specify the addresses manually (in addition to >> creating the VLAN interfaces manually with vconfig). >> >> The XORP handling of VLANs has never been great; recent patches have >> been made to try an improve it; but it's still has work to be done >> before it's up to user expectations. >> > > I don't ever test using default-system-config, but if you find > problems when using config from within Xorp, please report the > bug. > > In general, I'd suggest you drive all changes through xorp..ie, > tell it to set the IP instead of hoping it will figure things out > when you set it outside of xorp. > > You can script xorpsh using multiple -c 'command 1' -c 'command 2' .... > > It's not exactly user-friendly, but it works (for my uses, at least). > > And as always, patches are welcome, as are detailed bug reports > with xorp logs, OS & kernel version, etc. Please submit such > bug reports to the bugzilla so we don't loose track of it. > > > Being familiar with the Cisco routing CLI, these caveats seem quite >>> counter-intuitive... Could anybody help me understand if XORP was >>> deployed >>> outside the research/academia community? >>> >> > Probably not so much. We use it in our LANforge product, but we drive > xorp from our program (which builds networks with a GUI) using > programatically > created xorpsh commands and xorp config files. Those > code paths are pretty well tested, but I'm certain bugs remain > to be uncovered. > > Thanks, > Ben > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111207/86b02c5b/attachment.html From greearb at candelatech.com Wed Dec 7 22:15:57 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 22:15:57 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: <4EE0561D.9040008@candelatech.com> On 12/07/2011 09:58 PM, frank hu wrote: > Hi, Ben and Ray, > Thanks a lot for the kind help and open feedback. > I am investigating putting xorp as the multicast routing engine for our network device running Linux. From the CLIs I can see that it provides the set of > multicast routing features that I am interested in. The reason that xorp seems attractive to me is that it was listed as one test implementations in RFC 4602. > However the deficiency in the VLAN interfaces support is a big no-no on Linux based software routers. > Thanks again!! We've tested multicast on VLANs, and it works fine (for us, in our configurations). Please try without using the default-system-config and post logs and enough info to reproduce the problem if if fails. If you are using some non x86 system, try on x86 to make sure it's not some platform specific issue. I fixed some of that since the last release, so you might try cloning the latest code from github. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 23:03:08 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 23:03:08 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: <4EE0561D.9040008@candelatech.com> References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> <4EE0561D.9040008@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Thanks Ben. I will give this another try by removing the "default-system-config" from the VLANs and see how they work. So far I am testing on x86 system and the device will be x86_64, which I assume it should work as well if xorp works on x86. Again, thanks for all of the help! Frank On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 12/07/2011 09:58 PM, frank hu wrote: > >> Hi, Ben and Ray, >> Thanks a lot for the kind help and open feedback. >> I am investigating putting xorp as the multicast routing engine for our >> network device running Linux. From the CLIs I can see that it provides the >> set of >> multicast routing features that I am interested in. The reason that xorp >> seems attractive to me is that it was listed as one test implementations in >> RFC 4602. >> However the deficiency in the VLAN interfaces support is a big no-no on >> Linux based software routers. >> Thanks again!! >> > > We've tested multicast on VLANs, and it works fine (for us, in our > configurations). > > Please try without using the default-system-config and post logs and > enough info to reproduce > the problem if if fails. > > If you are using some non x86 system, try on x86 to make sure it's not some > platform specific issue. I fixed some of that since the last release, so > you > might try cloning the latest code from github. > > > Thanks, > Ben > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111207/7e939007/attachment.html From rps at maine.edu Thu Dec 8 05:52:03 2011 From: rps at maine.edu (Ray Soucy) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 08:52:03 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: To be fair, I haven't been able to migrate to the current XORP yet, so these bugs are from 1.6 with patches; I may be speaking based on old information. If they've since been fixed then that's great. With 1.6 we do perform multicast (using IGMP, PIM-SM) just fine on 802.1Q interfaces in production for several connections. One note on VLANs and Linux; you will likely want to avoid using the native (untagged) interface for anything if you setup sub-interfaces; depending on your driver, and the way an application is implemented (raw sockets for example), the untagged interface may also see the tagged traffic as untagged. Also avoid the use of 31-bit prefixes for point-to-point networks like the plague. You can configure them, but they are _not_ supported (use a 30-bit prefix instead); otherwise you will see some very odd (and hard to troubleshoot) breakage. On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 12/07/2011 07:13 PM, Ray Soucy wrote: >> >> I haven't had good luck with default-system-configuration and VLAN >> interfaces; especially where PIM is concerned. >> >> You likely need to specify the addresses manually (in addition to >> creating the VLAN interfaces manually with vconfig). >> >> The XORP handling of VLANs has never been great; recent patches have >> been made to try an improve it; but it's still has work to be done >> before it's up to user expectations. > > > I don't ever test using default-system-config, but if you find > problems when using config from within Xorp, please report the > bug. > > In general, I'd suggest you drive all changes through xorp..ie, > tell it to set the IP instead of hoping it will figure things out > when you set it outside of xorp. > > You can script xorpsh using multiple -c 'command 1' -c 'command 2' .... > > It's not exactly user-friendly, but it works (for my uses, at least). > > And as always, patches are welcome, as are detailed bug reports > with xorp logs, OS & kernel version, etc. ?Please submit such > bug reports to the bugzilla so we don't loose track of it. > > > >>> Being familiar with the Cisco routing CLI, these caveats seem quite >>> counter-intuitive... Could anybody help me understand if XORP was >>> deployed >>> outside the research/academia community? > > > Probably not so much. ?We use it in our LANforge product, but we drive > xorp from our program (which builds networks with a GUI) using > programatically > created xorpsh commands and xorp config files. ?Those > code paths are pretty well tested, but I'm certain bugs remain > to be uncovered. > > Thanks, > Ben > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc ?http://www.candelatech.com -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/ From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 10:47:23 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 10:47:23 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Thanks for all the helpful input. In my setup, I did have vlan300 and vlan800 created on top of eth0. Upon the suggestion, I removed "eth0" from the xorp interfaces configuration. After removing the configuration option "default-system-config" from the interfaces, I now see that IGMP and PIM are happier than before. I don't see the clueless error messages that some configurations are not valid. It definitely works better now. Still battling to get the multicast traffic routed end-2-end. Frank On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 5:52 AM, Ray Soucy wrote: > To be fair, I haven't been able to migrate to the current XORP yet, so > these bugs are from 1.6 with patches; I may be speaking based on old > information. > > If they've since been fixed then that's great. > > With 1.6 we do perform multicast (using IGMP, PIM-SM) just fine on > 802.1Q interfaces in production for several connections. > > One note on VLANs and Linux; you will likely want to avoid using the > native (untagged) interface for anything if you setup sub-interfaces; > depending on your driver, and the way an application is implemented > (raw sockets for example), the untagged interface may also see the > tagged traffic as untagged. > > Also avoid the use of 31-bit prefixes for point-to-point networks like > the plague. You can configure them, but they are _not_ supported (use > a 30-bit prefix instead); otherwise you will see some very odd (and > hard to troubleshoot) breakage. > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Ben Greear > wrote: > > On 12/07/2011 07:13 PM, Ray Soucy wrote: > >> > >> I haven't had good luck with default-system-configuration and VLAN > >> interfaces; especially where PIM is concerned. > >> > >> You likely need to specify the addresses manually (in addition to > >> creating the VLAN interfaces manually with vconfig). > >> > >> The XORP handling of VLANs has never been great; recent patches have > >> been made to try an improve it; but it's still has work to be done > >> before it's up to user expectations. > > > > > > I don't ever test using default-system-config, but if you find > > problems when using config from within Xorp, please report the > > bug. > > > > In general, I'd suggest you drive all changes through xorp..ie, > > tell it to set the IP instead of hoping it will figure things out > > when you set it outside of xorp. > > > > You can script xorpsh using multiple -c 'command 1' -c 'command 2' .... > > > > It's not exactly user-friendly, but it works (for my uses, at least). > > > > And as always, patches are welcome, as are detailed bug reports > > with xorp logs, OS & kernel version, etc. Please submit such > > bug reports to the bugzilla so we don't loose track of it. > > > > > > > >>> Being familiar with the Cisco routing CLI, these caveats seem quite > >>> counter-intuitive... Could anybody help me understand if XORP was > >>> deployed > >>> outside the research/academia community? > > > > > > Probably not so much. We use it in our LANforge product, but we drive > > xorp from our program (which builds networks with a GUI) using > > programatically > > created xorpsh commands and xorp config files. Those > > code paths are pretty well tested, but I'm certain bugs remain > > to be uncovered. > > > > Thanks, > > Ben > > > > -- > > Ben Greear > > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > > > > -- > Ray Soucy > > Epic Communications Specialist > > Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 > > Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System > http://www.networkmaine.net/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111208/01b7ea9a/attachment.html From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 11:08:02 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:08:02 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Hi, I still need more help. I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration from scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over "vlan800" and committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to add plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". Unfortunately it failed at this step. xorp at feng-desktop# show protocols { igmp { interface vlan800 { vif vlan800 { } } } pimsm4 { interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { dr-priority: 41 } } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > } > } bootstrap { } } } interfaces { interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { address 172.15.3.212 { prefix-length: 24 } } } interface vlan800 { vif vlan800 { address 172.15.80.212 { prefix-length: 24 } } } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > } > } } > plumbing { > mfea4 { > interface vlan300 { > vif vlan300 { > } > } > interface vlan800 { > vif vlan800 { > } > } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > } > } > } > } rtrmgr { config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" } [edit] xorp at desktop# commit ERROR: failed to lock the configuration. No Finder? The configuration has not been changed. Fix this error, and run "commit" again. xorp at desktop# commit *ERROR: failed to lock the configuration. No Finder? *The configuration has not been changed. Fix this error, and run "commit" again. xorp at desktop# " The error message seems weird. It complained "failed to lock the configuration". "xorp at desktop# quit ERROR: There are uncommitted changes. Use "commit" to commit the changes, or "exit discard" to discard them. xorp at desktop# exit discard ERROR: failed to inform rtrmgr of leaving config mode. No Finder? xorp at desktop> quit at feng-desktop> $ ./sbin/xorpsh Waiting for xorp_rtrmgr... $ ps -ef|grep xorp xorp 2241 2112 0 09:28 pts/1 00:00:00 su xorp xorp 2249 2241 0 09:29 pts/1 00:00:00 sh xorp 2290 2249 0 10:07 pts/1 00:00:00 ps -ef xorp 2291 2249 0 10:07 pts/1 00:00:00 grep xorp $ " So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" and "xorp_igmp". It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111208/3a375d05/attachment.html From greearb at candelatech.com Thu Dec 8 11:11:24 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:11:24 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: <4EE10BDC.6010202@candelatech.com> On 12/08/2011 11:08 AM, frank hu wrote: > > Hi, > I still need more help. > I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration from scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over "vlan800" and > committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to add plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". Unfortunately it failed at > this step. Look for core files and errors in the xorp logs. If you find cores, use gdb to get a backtrace (compile with debugging symbols if you haven't already). Use 'ulimit -c unlimited' before starting xorp_rtrmgr if it is crashing and not dumping core files. Thanks, Ben > So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" and "xorp_igmp". > It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From rps at maine.edu Thu Dec 8 11:41:42 2011 From: rps at maine.edu (Ray Soucy) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 14:41:42 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Try the following: Don't define "register_vif" as an interface under the interfaces block. Create your plumbing block first and commit the change, then try to add the register_vif interface to your pimsm4 block. It should not be added to the igmp block. Also don't forget your fib2mrib block. I'm not sure about the current version, but I know that for 1.6 the order you applied configuration steps was very touchy. On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:08 PM, frank hu wrote: > > Hi, > > I still need more help. > > I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration from > scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over > "vlan800" and committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to > add plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". > Unfortunately it failed at this step. > > xorp at feng-desktop# show > ??? protocols { > ??????? igmp { > ??????????? interface vlan800 { > ??????????????? vif vlan800 { > > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??????? pimsm4 { > ??????????? interface vlan300 { > ??????????????? vif vlan300 { > ??????????????????? dr-priority: 41 > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } >>?????????? interface "register_vif" { >>?????????????? vif "register_vif" { >>?????????????? } >>?????????? } > ??????????? bootstrap { > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??? } > ??? interfaces { > > ??????? interface vlan300 { > ??????????? vif vlan300 { > ??????????????? address 172.15.3.212 { > ??????????????????? prefix-length: 24 > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????? } > ??????? interface vlan800 { > ??????????? vif vlan800 { > ??????????????? address 172.15.80.212 { > ??????????????????? prefix-length: 24 > ??????????????? } > ??????????? } > ??????? } >>?????? interface "register_vif" { >>?????????? vif "register_vif" { >>?????????? } >>?????? } > ??? } >>?? plumbing { >>?????? mfea4 { >>?????????? interface vlan300 { >>?????????????? vif vlan300 { >>?????????????? } >>?????????? } >>?????????? interface vlan800 { >>?????????????? vif vlan800 { >>?????????????? } >>?????????? } >>?????????? interface "register_vif" { >>?????????????? vif "register_vif" { >>?????????????? } >>?????????? } >>?????? } >>?? } > ??? rtrmgr { > ??????? config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" > ??? } > [edit] > xorp at desktop# commit > ERROR: failed to lock the configuration. No Finder? > The configuration has not been changed. > Fix this error, and run "commit" again. > xorp at desktop# commit > ERROR: failed to lock the configuration. No Finder? > The configuration has not been changed. > Fix this error, and run "commit" again. > xorp at desktop# > " > > The error message seems weird. It complained "failed to lock the > configuration". > > "xorp at desktop# quit > ERROR: There are uncommitted changes. > Use "commit" to commit the changes, or "exit discard" to discard them. > xorp at desktop# exit discard > ERROR: failed to inform rtrmgr of leaving config mode. No Finder? > xorp at desktop> quit at feng-desktop> > $ ./sbin/xorpsh > Waiting for xorp_rtrmgr... > $ ps -ef|grep xorp > xorp????? 2241? 2112? 0 09:28 pts/1??? 00:00:00 su xorp > xorp????? 2249? 2241? 0 09:29 pts/1??? 00:00:00 sh > xorp????? 2290? 2249? 0 10:07 pts/1??? 00:00:00 ps -ef > xorp????? 2291? 2249? 0 10:07 pts/1??? 00:00:00 grep xorp > $ > " > So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" and > "xorp_igmp". > > It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. > > -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/ From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 11:49:01 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:49:01 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: thanks Ray. Here is the configuration that consistently triggered the issue. xorp at desktop# show protocols { igmp { interface vlan800 { vif vlan800 { } } } pimsm4 { interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { dr-priority: 32 } } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > } > } bootstrap { } } } interfaces { interface vlan300 { vif vlan300 { address 172.15.3.212 { prefix-length: 24 } } } interface vlan800 { vif vlan800 { address 172.15.80.212 { prefix-length: 24 } } } } rtrmgr { config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" } [edit] xorp at desktop# commit Finder disconnected. No Finder? OK [edit] xorp at desktop# On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Ray Soucy wrote: > Try the following: > > Don't define "register_vif" as an interface under the interfaces block. > > Create your plumbing block first and commit the change, then try to > add the register_vif interface to your pimsm4 block. It should not be > added to the igmp block. > > Also don't forget your fib2mrib block. > > I'm not sure about the current version, but I know that for 1.6 the > order you applied configuration steps was very touchy. > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:08 PM, frank hu wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I still need more help. > > > > I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration from > > scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over > > "vlan800" and committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to > > add plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". > > Unfortunately it failed at this step. > > > > xorp at feng-desktop# show > > protocols { > > igmp { > > interface vlan800 { > > vif vlan800 { > > > > } > > } > > } > > pimsm4 { > > interface vlan300 { > > vif vlan300 { > > dr-priority: 41 > > } > > } > >> interface "register_vif" { > >> vif "register_vif" { > >> } > >> } > > bootstrap { > > } > > } > > } > > interfaces { > > > > interface vlan300 { > > vif vlan300 { > > address 172.15.3.212 { > > prefix-length: 24 > > } > > } > > } > > interface vlan800 { > > vif vlan800 { > > address 172.15.80.212 { > > prefix-length: 24 > > } > > } > > } > >> interface "register_vif" { > >> vif "register_vif" { > >> } > >> } > > } > >> plumbing { > >> mfea4 { > >> interface vlan300 { > >> vif vlan300 { > >> } > >> } > >> interface vlan800 { > >> vif vlan800 { > >> } > >> } > >> interface "register_vif" { > >> vif "register_vif" { > >> } > >> } > >> } > >> } > > rtrmgr { > > config-directory: "/etc/xorp/" > > } > > [edit] > > xorp at desktop# commit > > ERROR: failed to lock the configuration. No Finder? > > The configuration has not been changed. > > Fix this error, and run "commit" again. > > xorp at desktop# commit > > ERROR: failed to lock the configuration. No Finder? > > The configuration has not been changed. > > Fix this error, and run "commit" again. > > xorp at desktop# > > " > > > > The error message seems weird. It complained "failed to lock the > > configuration". > > > > "xorp at desktop# quit > > ERROR: There are uncommitted changes. > > Use "commit" to commit the changes, or "exit discard" to discard them. > > xorp at desktop# exit discard > > ERROR: failed to inform rtrmgr of leaving config mode. No Finder? > > xorp at desktop> quit at feng-desktop> > > $ ./sbin/xorpsh > > Waiting for xorp_rtrmgr... > > $ ps -ef|grep xorp > > xorp 2241 2112 0 09:28 pts/1 00:00:00 su xorp > > xorp 2249 2241 0 09:29 pts/1 00:00:00 sh > > xorp 2290 2249 0 10:07 pts/1 00:00:00 ps -ef > > xorp 2291 2249 0 10:07 pts/1 00:00:00 grep xorp > > $ > > " > > So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" and > > "xorp_igmp". > > > > It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. > > > > > > > > -- > Ray Soucy > > Epic Communications Specialist > > Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 > > Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System > http://www.networkmaine.net/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111208/5c658adf/attachment.html From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 11:51:08 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:51:08 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: <4EE10BDC.6010202@candelatech.com> References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> <4EE10BDC.6010202@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Thanks Ben for the kind help! I did use the debuggers to look into the core dumps. However, I expected xorp to be reasonably stable and such core dumps to happen only occasionally. From what I can see, the features XORP multicast routing engine offers are pretty nice -- not too complex but good enough for even a lot enterprise users. However, the software suite doesn't seem mature enough to be bundled in industrial grade network devices. Just some comment, if XORP also targets outside the academia community, its overall configuration mechanism should be designed to be intuitive for Cisco IOS users for the simple reason that most router admins are much familiar with Cisco IOS CLIs. For example, why a multicast routing admin (of XORP) needs to manually add register_vif interface? The software suite needs to do that under the hood, instead of having the user do it. I think that my assessment of XORP multicast routing will stop here. Also thanks a lot to Ray and everyone else that helped me through the issues that I ran into -- I appreciate your time and your in-depth expertise in XORP. Frank On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 12/08/2011 11:08 AM, frank hu wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> I still need more help. >> I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration from >> scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over >> "vlan800" and >> committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to add >> plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". >> Unfortunately it failed at >> this step. >> > > Look for core files and errors in the xorp logs. If you find cores, use > gdb to get > a backtrace (compile with debugging symbols if you haven't already). > > Use 'ulimit -c unlimited' before starting xorp_rtrmgr if it is crashing and > not dumping core files. > > Thanks, > Ben > > > So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" and >> "xorp_igmp". >> It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. >> > > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111208/5255211f/attachment.html From esj at cs.fiu.edu Thu Dec 8 11:53:24 2011 From: esj at cs.fiu.edu (Eric S. Johnson) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:53:24 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> Message-ID: <20111208195324.77C22368000D@cheetah.cs.fiu.edu> Here is a working config file for vlans and multicast using a recent svn pull (1.8.5-WIP) on centos 5 linux. As Ray mentioned, its better to let the OS create the vlans and let xorp deal with them as "real" interfaces with a single vif. Note the fib2mrib and plumbing mfea sections. E ---- protocols { fib2mrib { disable: false } igmp { interface "eth0.10" { vif "eth0.10" { disable: true version: 2 enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false query-interval: 125 query-last-member-interval: 1 query-response-interval: 10 robust-count: 2 } } interface "eth0.14" { vif "eth0.14" { disable: false version: 2 enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false query-interval: 125 query-last-member-interval: 1 query-response-interval: 10 robust-count: 2 } } interface "eth0.15" { vif "eth0.15" { disable: true version: 2 enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false query-interval: 125 query-last-member-interval: 1 query-response-interval: 10 robust-count: 2 } } interface "eth0.16" { vif "eth0.16" { disable: false version: 2 enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false query-interval: 125 query-last-member-interval: 1 query-response-interval: 10 robust-count: 2 } } } ospf4 { router-id: X.X.X.X rfc1583-compatibility: true ip-router-alert: false area 0.0.0.125 { area-type: "normal" interface "eth0.16" { link-type: "broadcast" vif "eth0.16" { address X.X.X.X { priority: 1 hello-interval: 10 router-dead-interval: 40 interface-cost: 70 retransmit-interval: 5 transit-delay: 1 authentication { simple-password: "" md5 1 { password: "XXXXXXX" start-time: "" end-time: "" max-time-drift: 3600 } } disable: false } } } interface "eth0.15" { link-type: "broadcast" vif "eth0.15" { address X.X.X.X { priority: 1 hello-interval: 10 router-dead-interval: 40 interface-cost: 70 retransmit-interval: 5 transit-delay: 1 passive { disable: false host: false } disable: false } } } interface "eth0.10" { link-type: "broadcast" vif "eth0.10" { address X.X.X.X { priority: 1 hello-interval: 10 router-dead-interval: 40 interface-cost: 70 retransmit-interval: 5 transit-delay: 1 authentication { simple-password: "" md5 1 { password: "XXXXXXX" start-time: "" end-time: "" max-time-drift: 3600 } } disable: false } } } interface "eth0.14" { link-type: "broadcast" vif "eth0.14" { address X.X.X.X { priority: 1 hello-interval: 10 router-dead-interval: 40 interface-cost: 70 retransmit-interval: 5 transit-delay: 1 passive { disable: false host: false } disable: false } } } } } pimsm4 { disable: false interface "eth0.10" { vif "eth0.10" { disable: false dr-priority: 1 hello-period: 30 hello-triggered-delay: 5 } } interface "eth0.14" { vif "eth0.14" { disable: false dr-priority: 1 hello-period: 30 hello-triggered-delay: 5 } } interface "eth0.15" { vif "eth0.15" { disable: false dr-priority: 1 hello-period: 30 hello-triggered-delay: 5 } } interface "eth0.16" { vif "eth0.16" { disable: false dr-priority: 1 hello-period: 30 hello-triggered-delay: 5 } } interface "register_vif" { vif "register_vif" { disable: false dr-priority: 1 hello-period: 30 hello-triggered-delay: 5 } } static-rps { rp X.X.X.X { group-prefix 224.0.0.0/4 { rp-priority: 192 hash-mask-len: 30 } } } } } fea { unicast-forwarding4 { disable: false forwarding-entries { retain-on-startup: false retain-on-shutdown: true } } } interfaces { restore-original-config-on-shutdown: false interface "eth0.10" { description: "" disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif "eth0.10" { disable: false address X.X.X.X { prefix-length: 26 disable: false } } } interface "eth0.14" { description: "" disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif "eth0.14" { disable: false address X.X.X.X { prefix-length: 24 disable: false } } } interface "eth0.15" { description: "" disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif "eth0.15" { disable: false address X.X.X.X { prefix-length: 27 disable: false } } } interface "eth0.16" { description: "" disable: false discard: false unreachable: false management: false vif "eth0.16" { disable: false address X.X.X.X { prefix-length: 26 disable: false } } } } plumbing { mfea4 { disable: false interface "eth0.10" { vif "eth0.10" { disable: false } } interface "eth0.14" { vif "eth0.14" { disable: false } } interface "eth0.15" { vif "eth0.15" { disable: false } } interface "eth0.16" { vif "eth0.16" { disable: false } } interface "register_vif" { vif "register_vif" { disable: false } } } } From greearb at candelatech.com Thu Dec 8 11:58:26 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:58:26 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> <4EE10BDC.6010202@candelatech.com> Message-ID: <4EE116E2.7020306@candelatech.com> On 12/08/2011 11:51 AM, frank hu wrote: > Thanks Ben for the kind help! > I did use the debuggers to look into the core dumps. However, I expected xorp to be reasonably stable and such core dumps to happen only occasionally. From > what I can see, the features XORP multicast routing engine offers are pretty nice -- not too complex but good enough for even a lot enterprise users. However, > the software suite doesn't seem mature enough to be bundled in industrial grade network devices. I think xorp can be made stable, but it will likely require dev work & testing to deal with bugs in how you want to use it. In general, it is much more stable if you create the config file as you want it and then don't do too much with xorpsh. I've fixed the problems with how we do our own dynamic config of xorp...but obviously more remain. At the least, please open a bug report for what you found (with backtrace & xorp log, etc). > Just some comment, if XORP also targets outside the academia community, its overall configuration mechanism should be designed to be intuitive for Cisco IOS > users for the simple reason that most router admins are much familiar with Cisco IOS CLIs. For example, why a multicast routing admin (of XORP) needs to > manually add register_vif interface? The software suite needs to do that under the hood, instead of having the user do it. No arguments with this, but I have no time or interest to re-write all of this. If someone else wants to fund this or work on it, I'll be happy to work with them. > I think that my assessment of XORP multicast routing will stop here. I'd be curious to know what you find if you find something better... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From rps at maine.edu Thu Dec 8 12:16:00 2011 From: rps at maine.edu (Ray Soucy) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 15:16:00 -0500 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> <4EE10BDC.6010202@candelatech.com> Message-ID: XORP is production quality in terms of its functionality. The XORP shell doesn't work very well, and is "touchy" when trying to interactively configure it. We script the generation of the "config.boot" file, and boot XORP directly off the pre-written configuration, rather than trying to configure it through the XORP shell. We have not had any major stability or performance issues as a result. To my knowledge, there are no other open source projects that correctly support multicast. The closest is the pimd project for Quagga, but it was very limited in its functionality last time I checked (only supports SSM for example). The syntax of the XORP CLI is similar to what you would see from Juniper. The majority of network engineers can intuitively make use of it; bugs aside. I don't think it needs to be re-written to mirror Cisco. It just needs to be cleaned up. Perhaps by someone who would find value in such functionality. On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:51 PM, frank hu wrote: > > Thanks Ben for the kind help! > > I did use the debuggers to look into the core dumps. However, I expected > xorp to be?reasonably stable and such core dumps to happen only > occasionally.? From what I can see, the features XORP multicast routing > engine offers are pretty nice -- not too complex but good enough for?even a > lot?enterprise users. However, the software suite doesn't seem mature enough > to be bundled?in industrial grade network devices. > > Just some comment, if XORP also targets outside the academia community, its > overall configuration mechanism should be designed to be intuitive for Cisco > IOS users for the simple reason that most router admins are much familiar > with Cisco IOS CLIs. For example, why a multicast routing admin (of XORP) > needs to manually add register_vif interface? The software suite needs to do > that under the hood, instead of having the user do it. > > > I think that my assessment of XORP multicast routing will stop here. > > Also thanks a lot to Ray and everyone else that helped me?through the issues > that I ran into -- I appreciate your time and your in-depth expertise in > XORP. > > Frank > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Ben Greear wrote: >> >> On 12/08/2011 11:08 AM, frank hu wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> I still need more help. >>> I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration from >>> scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over >>> "vlan800" and >>> committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to add >>> plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". >>> Unfortunately it failed at >>> this step. >> >> >> Look for core files and errors in the xorp logs. ?If you find cores, use >> gdb to get >> a backtrace (compile with debugging symbols if you haven't already). >> >> Use 'ulimit -c unlimited' before starting xorp_rtrmgr if it is crashing >> and >> not dumping core files. >> >> Thanks, >> Ben >> >> >>> So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" and >>> "xorp_igmp". >>> It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. >> >> >> >> -- >> Ben Greear >> Candela Technologies Inc ?http://www.candelatech.com >> > -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/ From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 13:45:50 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 13:45:50 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> <4EE10BDC.6010202@candelatech.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ray, thanks for the tips... Yes, it seems that XORP is happier with a complete configuration file. However, I still don't get multicast routing to work end-2-end with xorp. Thanks! On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Ray Soucy wrote: > XORP is production quality in terms of its functionality. The XORP > shell doesn't work very well, and is "touchy" when trying to > interactively configure it. > > We script the generation of the "config.boot" file, and boot XORP > directly off the pre-written configuration, rather than trying to > configure it through the XORP shell. > > We have not had any major stability or performance issues as a result. > > To my knowledge, there are no other open source projects that > correctly support multicast. The closest is the pimd project for > Quagga, but it was very limited in its functionality last time I > checked (only supports SSM for example). > > The syntax of the XORP CLI is similar to what you would see from > Juniper. The majority of network engineers can intuitively make use > of it; bugs aside. I don't think it needs to be re-written to mirror > Cisco. It just needs to be cleaned up. Perhaps by someone who would > find value in such functionality. > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:51 PM, frank hu wrote: > > > > Thanks Ben for the kind help! > > > > I did use the debuggers to look into the core dumps. However, I expected > > xorp to be reasonably stable and such core dumps to happen only > > occasionally. From what I can see, the features XORP multicast routing > > engine offers are pretty nice -- not too complex but good enough > for even a > > lot enterprise users. However, the software suite doesn't seem mature > enough > > to be bundled in industrial grade network devices. > > > > Just some comment, if XORP also targets outside the academia community, > its > > overall configuration mechanism should be designed to be intuitive for > Cisco > > IOS users for the simple reason that most router admins are much familiar > > with Cisco IOS CLIs. For example, why a multicast routing admin (of XORP) > > needs to manually add register_vif interface? The software suite needs > to do > > that under the hood, instead of having the user do it. > > > > > > I think that my assessment of XORP multicast routing will stop here. > > > > Also thanks a lot to Ray and everyone else that helped me through the > issues > > that I ran into -- I appreciate your time and your in-depth expertise in > > XORP. > > > > Frank > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Ben Greear > wrote: > >> > >> On 12/08/2011 11:08 AM, frank hu wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> I still need more help. > >>> I rebooted my x86 box with xorp and restarted the xorp configuration > from > >>> scratch. I configured PIM over the interface "vlan300" and IGMP over > >>> "vlan800" and > >>> committed the configurations. It went well. Then I tried to add > >>> plumbing/mfea4 and also the PIM register interface "register_vif". > >>> Unfortunately it failed at > >>> this step. > >> > >> > >> Look for core files and errors in the xorp logs. If you find cores, use > >> gdb to get > >> a backtrace (compile with debugging symbols if you haven't already). > >> > >> Use 'ulimit -c unlimited' before starting xorp_rtrmgr if it is crashing > >> and > >> not dumping core files. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Ben > >> > >> > >>> So the critical process "xorp_rtrmgr" was gone, along with "xorp_pim" > and > >>> "xorp_igmp". > >>> It seems that a configuration change triggered the above to happen. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Ben Greear > >> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > >> > > > > > > -- > Ray Soucy > > Epic Communications Specialist > > Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 > > Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System > http://www.networkmaine.net/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111208/df4550e3/attachment.html From frank.1975.hu at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 13:47:23 2011 From: frank.1975.hu at gmail.com (frank hu) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 13:47:23 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] {Disarmed} Re: xorp: enable IGMP/PIM-SM over a VLAN interface on Linux In-Reply-To: <20111208195324.77C22368000D@cheetah.cs.fiu.edu> References: <4EE0450C.2070702@candelatech.com> <20111208195324.77C22368000D@cheetah.cs.fiu.edu> Message-ID: Thanks Eric for sharing your working config file. It does work much better than xorpsh. On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Eric S. Johnson wrote: > > Here is a working config file for vlans and multicast using a recent > svn pull (1.8.5-WIP) on centos 5 linux. > > As Ray mentioned, its better to let the OS create the vlans > and let xorp deal with them as "real" interfaces with a single vif. > > Note the fib2mrib and plumbing mfea sections. > > E > > ---- > > > > protocols { > fib2mrib { > disable: false > } > igmp { > interface "eth0.10" { > vif "eth0.10" { > disable: true > version: 2 > enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false > query-interval: 125 > query-last-member-interval: 1 > query-response-interval: 10 > robust-count: 2 > } > } > interface "eth0.14" { > vif "eth0.14" { > disable: false > version: 2 > enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false > query-interval: 125 > query-last-member-interval: 1 > query-response-interval: 10 > robust-count: 2 > } > } > interface "eth0.15" { > vif "eth0.15" { > disable: true > version: 2 > enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false > query-interval: 125 > query-last-member-interval: 1 > query-response-interval: 10 > robust-count: 2 > } > } > interface "eth0.16" { > vif "eth0.16" { > disable: false > version: 2 > enable-ip-router-alert-option-check: false > query-interval: 125 > query-last-member-interval: 1 > query-response-interval: 10 > robust-count: 2 > } > } > } > ospf4 { > router-id: X.X.X.X > rfc1583-compatibility: true > ip-router-alert: false > area 0.0.0.125 { > area-type: "normal" > interface "eth0.16" { > link-type: "broadcast" > vif "eth0.16" { > address X.X.X.X { > priority: 1 > hello-interval: 10 > router-dead-interval: 40 > interface-cost: 70 > retransmit-interval: 5 > transit-delay: 1 > authentication { > simple-password: "" > md5 1 { > password: "XXXXXXX" > start-time: "" > end-time: "" > max-time-drift: 3600 > } > } > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "eth0.15" { > link-type: "broadcast" > vif "eth0.15" { > address X.X.X.X { > priority: 1 > hello-interval: 10 > router-dead-interval: 40 > interface-cost: 70 > retransmit-interval: 5 > transit-delay: 1 > passive { > disable: false > host: false > } > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "eth0.10" { > link-type: "broadcast" > vif "eth0.10" { > address X.X.X.X { > priority: 1 > hello-interval: 10 > router-dead-interval: 40 > interface-cost: 70 > retransmit-interval: 5 > transit-delay: 1 > authentication { > simple-password: "" > md5 1 { > password: "XXXXXXX" > start-time: "" > end-time: "" > max-time-drift: 3600 > } > } > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "eth0.14" { > link-type: "broadcast" > vif "eth0.14" { > address X.X.X.X { > priority: 1 > hello-interval: 10 > router-dead-interval: 40 > interface-cost: 70 > retransmit-interval: 5 > transit-delay: 1 > passive { > disable: false > host: false > } > disable: false > } > } > } > } > } > pimsm4 { > disable: false > interface "eth0.10" { > vif "eth0.10" { > disable: false > dr-priority: 1 > hello-period: 30 > hello-triggered-delay: 5 > } > } > interface "eth0.14" { > vif "eth0.14" { > disable: false > dr-priority: 1 > hello-period: 30 > hello-triggered-delay: 5 > } > } > interface "eth0.15" { > vif "eth0.15" { > disable: false > dr-priority: 1 > hello-period: 30 > hello-triggered-delay: 5 > } > } > interface "eth0.16" { > vif "eth0.16" { > disable: false > dr-priority: 1 > hello-period: 30 > hello-triggered-delay: 5 > } > } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > disable: false > dr-priority: 1 > hello-period: 30 > hello-triggered-delay: 5 > } > } > static-rps { > rp X.X.X.X { > group-prefix 224.0.0.0/4 { > rp-priority: 192 > hash-mask-len: 30 > } > } > } > } > } > fea { > unicast-forwarding4 { > disable: false > forwarding-entries { > retain-on-startup: false > retain-on-shutdown: true > } > } > } > interfaces { > restore-original-config-on-shutdown: false > interface "eth0.10" { > description: "" > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif "eth0.10" { > disable: false > address X.X.X.X { > prefix-length: 26 > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "eth0.14" { > description: "" > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif "eth0.14" { > disable: false > address X.X.X.X { > prefix-length: 24 > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "eth0.15" { > description: "" > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif "eth0.15" { > disable: false > address X.X.X.X { > prefix-length: 27 > disable: false > } > } > } > interface "eth0.16" { > description: "" > disable: false > discard: false > unreachable: false > management: false > vif "eth0.16" { > disable: false > address X.X.X.X { > prefix-length: 26 > disable: false > } > } > } > } > plumbing { > mfea4 { > disable: false > interface "eth0.10" { > vif "eth0.10" { > disable: false > } > } > interface "eth0.14" { > vif "eth0.14" { > disable: false > } > } > interface "eth0.15" { > vif "eth0.15" { > disable: false > } > } > interface "eth0.16" { > vif "eth0.16" { > disable: false > } > } > interface "register_vif" { > vif "register_vif" { > disable: false > } > } > } > } > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111208/960e749a/attachment-0001.html From mechno at gmail.com Fri Dec 9 06:35:42 2011 From: mechno at gmail.com (Maarten) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:35:42 +0100 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XrlAtomNotFound exception Message-ID: Hi all, I've been fuzzing around with the xorp source code for the last two weeks to get an idea how it works. Some of you might remember I am currently developing a new routing protocol. Or trying to. Whatever. I think I have the IPC / finder stuff working now as the common interface gets called and the eventloop runs. But after a couple of loops, typically 7 or so, I get a XrlArgs::XrlAtomNotFound exception. What on earth is that? In the logfile it looks like this: Terminate called after throwing an instance of 'XrlArgs::XrlAtomNotFound' [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140028 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/task.cc:1414 execute_done ] 210 Transport failed [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140073 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/task.cc:2012 task_fail ] Shutting down fatally wounded process (rants) [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140095 INFO xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/module_manager.cc:180 terminate ] Terminating module: rants [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140114 INFO xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/module_manager.cc:203 terminate ] Killing module: rants [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140148 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/master_conf_tree.cc:700 commit_pass2_done ] Commit failed: 210 Transport failed [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140164 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/master_conf_tree.cc:269 config_done ] Configuration failed: 210 Transport failed (rants is the name of my new soon to be routing protocol) What am I doing wrong? (I am currently not yet cycling my node status (you know, from status_codes.h). Might that have anything to do with it?) grtz & tnx for help in advance! Maarten -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111209/3a9563ed/attachment.html From greearb at candelatech.com Fri Dec 9 09:00:39 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 09:00:39 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] XrlAtomNotFound exception In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EE23EB7.9030807@candelatech.com> On 12/09/2011 06:35 AM, Maarten wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been fuzzing around with the xorp source code for the last two weeks to get an idea how it works. Some of you might remember I am currently developing a > new routing protocol. Or trying to. Whatever. I think I have the IPC / finder stuff working now as the common interface gets called and the eventloop runs. > > But after a couple of loops, typically 7 or so, I get a XrlArgs::XrlAtomNotFound exception. What on earth is that? I hate the exception handling in xorp. My suggestion is to find the code that throws that exception, and turn it into an assert instead. That way, you get a core file and a backtrace from gdb so you can see where the bug is triggered. A patch that added proper error handling and removed the exception entirely would be welcome! Thanks, Ben > > In the logfile it looks like this: > > Terminate called after throwing an instance of 'XrlArgs::XrlAtomNotFound' > [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140028 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/task.cc:1414 execute_done ] 210 Transport failed > [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140073 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/task.cc:2012 task_fail ] Shutting down fatally wounded process (rants) > [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140095 INFO xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/module_manager.cc:180 terminate ] Terminating module: rants > [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140114 INFO xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/module_manager.cc:203 terminate ] Killing module: rants > [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140148 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/master_conf_tree.cc:700 commit_pass2_done ] Commit failed: 210 Transport failed > [ 2011/12/09 14:44:15.140164 ERROR xorp_rtrmgr:3850 RTRMGR rtrmgr/master_conf_tree.cc:269 config_done ] Configuration failed: 210 Transport failed > > (rants is the name of my new soon to be routing protocol) > > What am I doing wrong? > (I am currently not yet cycling my node status (you know, from status_codes.h). Might that have anything to do with it?) > > > grtz & tnx for help in advance! > > Maarten > > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From Boris.Zweimueller at albistechnologies.com Tue Dec 13 00:47:10 2011 From: Boris.Zweimueller at albistechnologies.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Zweim=FCller=2C_Boris?=) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 09:47:10 +0100 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] Distributed FEA on multiiple hosts with different FE implementation Message-ID: Hi all I want to build a distributed router with multiple hosts and with different FE implementations on each host (one very hw specific). Does the current XORP version already support distributed FEA? I read something about it,but I am not sure wether this really works. Actually what I want to have ist the follwoing: Machine A: - All routing and management processes - FEA1 together with FE for given OS/HW Machine B, Hardware Type B: - FEA2 together with FE for given OS/HW (different FE than A). Now, the management hardware on machine A should be able to decide that a XRL configuring a port on machine B should go to the FEA2 on machine B. Is this possible? And if yes, can you point me to an example configuration? Thanks Boris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111213/a97954d3/attachment.html From greearb at candelatech.com Tue Dec 13 07:43:01 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 07:43:01 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] Distributed FEA on multiiple hosts with different FE implementation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EE77285.80604@candelatech.com> On 12/13/2011 12:47 AM, Zweim?ller, Boris wrote: > Hi all > I want to build a distributed router with multiple hosts and with different FE implementations on each host (one very hw specific). > Does the current XORP version already support distributed FEA? I read something about it,but I am not sure wether this really works. > Actually what I want to have ist the follwoing: > Machine A: > - All routing and management processes > - FEA1 together with FE for given OS/HW > Machine B, Hardware Type B: > - FEA2 together with FE for given OS/HW (different FE than A). > Now, the management hardware on machine A should be able to decide that a XRL configuring a port on machine B should go to the FEA2 on machine B. > Is this possible? And if yes, can you point me to an example configuration? > Thanks Boris No, this doesn't work at present. I think it would take quite a bit of coding to make it function. Running multiple protocols (OSPF, RIP, etc) on different machines and talking to one FEA might function without too much work in the current code. Thanks, Ben > > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From aliemredgn at gmail.com Tue Dec 27 03:46:03 2011 From: aliemredgn at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ali_Emre_Do=C4=9Fan?=) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 13:46:03 +0200 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] Compilation & Validation Message-ID: Firstly, i'm sorry for my bad English. I have to use XORP platform for my graduate thesis and develop an application. Getting dependencies step is ok, no problem. But at the compilation step, "scons" command returns me more than 1 error. One of them says, "To fix, you may edit: /usr/include/linux/netfilter_ipv4/ip_tables.h". I did it, but still returns error. ?s there anybody help me? i attached Screenshot for view. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111227/bb8eeef7/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Screenshot at 2011-12-27 13:35:33.png Type: image/png Size: 158469 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20111227/bb8eeef7/attachment-0001.bin From greearb at candelatech.com Tue Dec 27 07:56:41 2011 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 07:56:41 -0800 Subject: [Xorp-hackers] Compilation & Validation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EF9EAB9.4070708@candelatech.com> On 12/27/2011 03:46 AM, Ali Emre Do?an wrote: > Firstly, i'm sorry for my bad English. I have to use XORP platform for my graduate thesis and develop an application. Getting dependencies step is ok, no > problem. But at the compilation step, "scons" command returns me more than 1 error. One of them says, "To fix, you may edit: > /usr/include/linux/netfilter_ipv4/ip_tables.h". I did it, but still returns error. ?s there anybody help me? i attached Screenshot for view. What OS and what version of the OS are you using to compile? Looks like the problem isn't related to the ip_tables logic. Please just cut-and paste the output instead of sending screen shots next time...it's easier to use that way. Thanks, Ben > > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > Xorp-hackers at icir.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com