<div>Hi Ray</div>
<div>We can try it in the lab here as we have a Cisco 7200 here Could you open a bug so we can track it? Please include Xorp and Cisco configurations, CLI commands and logs and versions etc</div>
<div> </div>
<div> We have peered with Cisco using RIP in the lab.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Syed<br><br></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Soucy, Ray <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rays@maine.edu">rays@maine.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">We first suspected this as well. We added the Link Local address and<br>didn't see a change.<br>We also tried creating an import policy for RIPng, no luck here either.<br>
<br>It's very odd. What we're doing is very simple... I was hoping it was<br>just my ignorance on how to configure XORP.<br><br>I don't think it's a v6 multicast issue since XORP is seeing the packets<br>
and announcing routes successfully (though that default metric of 0 is<br>rather irritating).<br><br>Is anyone else successfully talking to a Cisco box using RIPng (or any<br>other non-XORP box)?<br><br>I think the next option is on a source level to perhaps make error<br>
messages more useful than "packet discarded".<br><font color="#888888"><br>Ray<br></font>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="h5"><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Pavlin Radoslavov [mailto:<a href="mailto:pavlin@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU">pavlin@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU</a>]<br>Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 3:23 AM<br>To: Soucy, Ray<br>Cc: <a href="mailto:xorp-hackers@icir.org">xorp-hackers@icir.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Xorp-hackers] RIPng not Accepting routes from Cisco box.<br><br>[A copy of an reply I just sent to xorp-users]<br><br>I am not sure this will solve the problem, but you might try to<br>explictly add the link-local address to the corresponding<br>
ripng/interface/vif and interfaces/interface/vif blocks.<br><br>Pavlin<br><br>Soucy, Ray <<a href="mailto:rays@maine.edu">rays@maine.edu</a>> wrote:<br><br>> I've been trying to get RIPng working on a XORP 1.6 box.<br>
><br>> From what I can see the XORP box is rejecting routes received by a<br>Cisco<br>> box running RIPng.<br>><br>> I verified that the Cisco router is announcing IPv6 routes through<br>> RIPng, but on the XORP side when I do a trace I get:<br>
><br>> [ 2009/03/10 11:16:17 TRACE xorp_ripng RIP ] Packet on<br>> 00000000-49b67bfe-000cb2c3-42150000 from interface eth0 vif eth0<br>> fe80::219:7ff:fea8:4280/521 604 bytes<br>> [ 2009/03/10 11:16:17 TRACE xorp_ripng RIP ] Discarding packet<br>
> fe80::219:7ff:fea8:4280/521 604 bytes<br>><br>> I'm not sure why it would be discarding the packet, can anyone shed<br>some<br>> light on what would cause a RIPng packet to be discarded?<br>><br>> Also, on the Cisco side, I can get the route advertisements from XORP,<br>
> so routing is working in one direction (by the way, routes were going<br>> out with a metic of 0 so they were being rejected by default, until I<br>> set a policy to bump the metric to 1).<br>><br>> Here is debugging from the Cisco side:<br>
><br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: RIPng: Sending multicast update on<br>GigabitEthernet3/12<br>> for v6rip<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: src=FE80::219:7FF:FEA8:4280<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: dst=FF02::9 (GigabitEthernet3/12)<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: sport=521, dport=521, length=612<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: command=2, version=1, mbz=0, #rte=30<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=1, prefix=2610:48::28/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=1, prefix=2610:48:402::8/126<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=1, prefix=2610:48:402::4/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48::24/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48::2C/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48:0:800::1/128<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48:100:800::/54<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48::34/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:800::/64<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:801::/64<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:802::/64<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:803::/64<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:804::/64<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:200:805::/64<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=2, prefix=2610:48::C/126<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48::30/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:0:1000::1/128<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=3, prefix=2610:48::10/126<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::8/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::18/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:100:1C00::/54<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::14/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:0:C00::1/128<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:0:400::1/128<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::4/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::20/126<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:1::4/126<br>
> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=2610:48:100:400::/54<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=120, metric=4, prefix=::/0<br>> Mar 10 11:06:12: tag=0, metric=4, prefix=2610:48::38/126<br>><br>
> I have no import policy set (only export). Essentially the<br>> configuration is identical to a working RIP configuration.<br>><br>> RIPng configuration:<br>><br>> interface eth0 {<br>> vif eth0 {<br>
> address 2610:48:402::6 {<br>> advertise-default-route: false<br>> }<br>> }<br>> }<br>> export: "RIPng-export"<br>><br>> RIPng-export policy:<br>
><br>> term 100 {<br>> from {<br>> protocol: "connected"<br>> network6-list: "RIPng-export"<br>> }<br>> then {<br>> metric: 1<br>
> }<br>> }<br>><br>> RIPng-export list:<br>><br>> network 2610:48:402:1::/64<br>><br>> Interface eth0:<br>><br>> description: "WAN"<br>> vif eth0 {<br>> address 169.244.10.50 {<br>
> prefix-length: 30<br>> }<br>> address 2610:48:402::6 {<br>> prefix-length: 126<br>> }<br>> }<br>><br>> Interface eth1:<br>><br>> description: "LAN"<br>
> vif eth1 {<br>> address 169.244.81.225 {<br>> prefix-length: 27<br>> }<br>> address 2610:48:402:1::1 {<br>> prefix-length: 64<br>> }<br>> }<br>
><br>> Do I need an import policy for RIPng?<br>><br>> Ray Soucy<br>> Communications Specialist<br>><br>> +1 (207) 561-3526<br>><br>> Communications and Network Services<br>><br>> University of Maine System<br>
> <a href="http://www.maine.edu/" target="_blank">http://www.maine.edu/</a><br>><br>><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Xorp-hackers mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:Xorp-hackers@icir.org">Xorp-hackers@icir.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers" target="_blank">http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Xorp-hackers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Xorp-hackers@icir.org">Xorp-hackers@icir.org</a><br><a href="http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers" target="_blank">http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>