[Xorp-users] OSPF terminated with signal 6.

Ben Greear greearb at candelatech.com
Thu Mar 20 17:36:10 PDT 2008


Atanu Ghosh wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Could you try this fix?

Ok, I tried again, and this time I'm quite sure I have your
patch applied properly.  I still get the assert.

I modified the code to just print a warning and then goto the bottom
of the method.  I'm not sure if my patch is right or not, but it doesn't
help much.  See farther down for log messages and a new assert relating
to index mismatch.

[area_router.cc]
@@ -2702,8 +2702,10 @@

      XLOG_ASSERT(!lsar->external());

-    if (!find_lsa(lsar, index))
-       XLOG_FATAL("LSA not in database: %s", cstring(*lsar));
+    if (!find_lsa(lsar, index)) {
+       XLOG_WARNING("LSA not in database: %s", cstring(*lsar));
+       goto out;
+    }

      if (i != index)
         XLOG_FATAL("Indexes don't match %u != %u %s",  XORP_UINT_CAST(i),
@@ -2726,6 +2728,7 @@
  #endif
      publish_all(lsar);

+  out:
      // Clear the timer otherwise there is a circular dependency.
      // The LSA contains a XorpTimer that points back to the LSA.
      lsar->get_timer().clear();


I'm not sure if this is due to my patch above, or if there are also index
issues.

[ 2008/03/20 17:26:34  WARNING xorp_ospfv2:26077 OSPF area_router.cc:2706 maxage_reached ] LSA not in database: Network-LSA:
LS age 3600 Options  0x2 DC: 0 EA: 0 N/P: 0 MC: 0 E: 1 LS type 0x2 Link State ID 10.25.28.28 Advertising Router 127.1.0.28 LS sequence number 0x80000001 LS checksum 0xda51 length 32
         Network Mask 0xffffff00
         Attached Router 127.1.0.28
         Attached Router 127.1.0.25
[ 2008/03/20 17:26:34  FATAL xorp_ospfv2:26077 OSPF area_router.cc:2713 maxage_reached ] Indexes don't match 167 != 141 Network-LSA:
LS age   90 Options  0x2 DC: 0 EA: 0 N/P: 0 MC: 0 E: 1 LS type 0x2 Link State ID 10.24.28.28 Advertising Router 127.1.0.28 LS sequence number 0x80000001 LS checksum 0xd855 length 32
         Network Mask 0xffffff00
         Attached Router 127.1.0.28
         Attached Router 127.1.0.24

This appears to happen when lots of xorp nodes are being joined together
(ie, interfaces added connecting directly to other xorp routers).

Let me know if I can get you more debugging info.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com



More information about the Xorp-users mailing list