From dimashink at gmail.com Sun Jun 2 13:03:56 2013 From: dimashink at gmail.com (=?KOI8-R?B?+8nOy8HS1csg5M3J1NLJyg==?=) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 00:03:56 +0400 Subject: [Xorp-users] Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry Message-ID: Hello, I am trying to make xorp multicast routing work with the following network configuration: Receiver (10.1.2.2) ------ (10.1.2.1) xorp_router_1 (10.1.3.1) ------- (10.1.3.2) xorp_router_2 (10.1.4.1) ------- (10.1.4.2) xorp_router_3 (10.1.1.1) ------ Sender (10.1.1.2) Sender and receiver use VLC for sending and receiving multicast traffic respectively. Every xorp_router has similar XORP configuration files: interfaces { restore-original-config-on-shutdown: false interface eth2 { disable: false default-system-config } interface eth3 { disable: false default-system-config } } fea { unicast-forwarding4 { disable: true } } plumbing { mfea4 { disable: false interface eth2 { vif eth2 { disable: false } } interface eth3 { vif eth3 { disable: false } } interface register_vif { vif register_vif { /* Note: this vif should be always enabled */ disable: false } } traceoptions { flag all { disable: false } } } } protocols { igmp { disable: false interface eth2 { vif eth2 { disable: false } } interface eth3 { vif eth3 { disable: false } } traceoptions { flag all { disable: false } } } } protocols { pimsm4 { disable: false interface eth2 { vif eth2 { disable: false } } interface eth3 { vif eth3 { disable: false } } interface register_vif { vif register_vif { /* Note: this vif should be always enabled */ disable: false } } static-rps { rp 10.1.4.2 { group-prefix 224.0.0.0/4 { } } } traceoptions { flag all { disable: false } } } } protocols { fib2mrib { disable: false } } When I start stream sender and receiver I can see following output on routers: For XORP_ROUTER_1 root at xorp_router_1> show pim join Group Source RP Flags 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 WC Upstream interface (RP): eth2 Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): 10.1.3.2 Upstream RPF'(*,G): 10.1.3.2 Upstream state: Joined Join timer: 52 Local receiver include WC: .O. Joins RP: ... Joins WC: ... Join state: ... Prune state: ... Prune pending state: ... I am assert winner state: ... I am assert loser state: ... Assert winner WC: ... Assert lost WC: ... Assert tracking WC: OO. Could assert WC: .O. I am DR: .OO Immediate olist RP: ... Immediate olist WC: .O. Inherited olist SG: .O. Inherited olist SG_RPT: .O. PIM include WC: .O. root at xorp_router_1> show pim mfc Group Source RP root at xorp_router_1> show mfea dataflow Group Source root at xorp_router_1> show igmp group Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State eth2 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 250 2 E eth2 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 251 2 E eth2 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 254 2 E eth3 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 255 2 E eth3 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 254 2 E eth3 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 251 2 E eth3 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.2 255 2 E For XORP_ROUTER_2 root at xorp_router_2> show pim join Group Source RP Flags 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 WC Upstream interface (RP): eth9 Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): 10.1.4.2 Upstream RPF'(*,G): 10.1.4.2 Upstream state: Joined Join timer: 46 Local receiver include WC: ... Joins RP: ... Joins WC: O.. Join state: O.. Prune state: ... Prune pending state: ... I am assert winner state: ... I am assert loser state: ... Assert winner WC: ... Assert lost WC: ... Assert tracking WC: OO. Could assert WC: O.. I am DR: O.O Immediate olist RP: ... Immediate olist WC: O.. Inherited olist SG: O.. Inherited olist SG_RPT: O.. PIM include WC: ... root at xorp_router_2> show pim mfc Group Source RP root at xorp_router_2> show mfea dataflow Group Source root at xorp_router_2> show igmp group Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State eth8 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 242 2 E eth8 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 246 2 E eth8 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 248 2 E eth9 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 257 2 E eth9 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 259 2 E eth9 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 256 2 E For XORP_ROUTER_3 root at xorp_router_3> show pim join Group Source RP Flags --------- Some lines are skipped------------ 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 10.1.4.2 SG SPT DirectlyConnectedS Upstream interface (S): eth11 Upstream interface (RP): register_vif Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): UNKNOWN Upstream MRIB next hop (S): UNKNOWN Upstream RPF'(S,G): UNKNOWN Upstream state: Joined Register state: RegisterNoinfo RegisterNotCouldRegister Join timer: 40 KAT(S,G) running: true Local receiver include WC: ... Local receiver include SG: ... Local receiver exclude SG: ... Joins RP: ... Joins WC: O.. Joins SG: ... Join state: ... Prune state: ... Prune pending state: ... I am assert winner state: ... I am assert loser state: ... Assert winner WC: ... Assert winner SG: ... Assert lost WC: ... Assert lost SG: ... Assert lost SG_RPT: ... Assert tracking SG: OO. Could assert WC: O.. Could assert SG: O.. I am DR: OOO Immediate olist RP: ... Immediate olist WC: O.. Immediate olist SG: ... Inherited olist SG: O.. Inherited olist SG_RPT: O.. PIM include WC: ... PIM include SG: ... PIM exclude SG: ... root at xorp_router_3> show pim mfc Group Source RP 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 10.1.4.2 Incoming interface : eth11 Outgoing interfaces: O.. root at xorp_router_3> show mfea dataflow Group Source 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 Measured(Start|Packets|Bytes) Type Thresh(Interval|Packets|Bytes) Remain 4448.914180|0|? <= 210.0|0|? 159.890042 root at xorp_router_3> show igmp group Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State eth10 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 248 2 E eth10 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 250 2 E eth10 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 248 2 E eth11 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 255 2 E eth11 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 138 2 E eth11 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 259 2 E Moreover, on xorp_router_3 in logs I can see records about adding entry to MFEA. But there are no such records in logs on xorp_router_1 and 2: --------------Skipped lines-------------------- [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76422 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] RX PIM_JOIN_PRUNE from 10.1.4.1 to 224.0.0.13 on vif eth10 [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76729 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. olist_disable_wrongvif = ..O [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76893 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. olist_disable_wrongvif = .OO [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.77098 TRACE xorp_fea:2032 MFEA fea/mfea_mrouter.cc:1568 add_mfc ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.77362 TRACE xorp_fea:2032 MFEA fea/mfea_mrouter.cc:1568 add_mfc ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. --------------Skipped lines-------------------- What's wrong with this configuration? Why second and third routers don't add entries to mfc? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-users/attachments/20130603/28604649/attachment.html From hosein.zarei at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 05:25:12 2013 From: hosein.zarei at gmail.com (Mohammad Hosein Zarei) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 16:55:12 +0430 Subject: [Xorp-users] Who support the Xorp project? Message-ID: Hi everyone I have some question about the Xorp project that I is listed below. Who develop the xorp? Who is sponsor project? Where used the xorp? What product and company are using xorp (in real world)? thanks. -- Mohammad Hosein Zarei -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-users/attachments/20130603/9399e940/attachment-0001.html From greearb at candelatech.com Mon Jun 3 14:27:05 2013 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 14:27:05 -0700 Subject: [Xorp-users] Who support the Xorp project? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51AD0A29.2000202@candelatech.com> On 06/03/2013 05:25 AM, Mohammad Hosein Zarei wrote: > Hi everyone > I have some question about the Xorp project that I is listed below. > Who develop the xorp? > Who is sponsor project? > Where used the xorp? What product and company are using xorp (in real world)? I work on it occasionally, and we use it in our network testing tool (LANforge) to support virtual routers (OSPF, multicast, etc). I'm the maintainer, and it's hosted on my web servers, so probably we are the sponsor as much as anyone at this point. I don't know a great deal about the routing protocols, though I've some knowledge for OSPF gained through hacking on xorp. In particular, I'm next to worthless when folks ask for help with multicast setups... Are you planning to use Xorp? Thanks, Ben > > thanks. > > -- > Mohammad Hosein > Zarei > > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-users mailing list > Xorp-users at xorp.org > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-users > -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From greearb at candelatech.com Mon Jun 3 14:30:18 2013 From: greearb at candelatech.com (Ben Greear) Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 14:30:18 -0700 Subject: [Xorp-users] some easy question about install and run XORP, Thank you In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51AD0AEA.5050408@candelatech.com> On 05/25/2013 12:03 AM, ??? wrote: > Hi all > I am new to XORP,I want to use XORP and Click as a router. > pc1 and pc2 as 2 routers , i want to see the ospf hello and lsa packet. I'm not sure Xorp and Click work currently. Probably would take some changes to 'fea' at least to get it working. > > it seems like a easy task.But when i compile and install xorp there are some questions.I really hope you could give me a hand.Thank you > > I read the getting_started in http://xorp.run.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/latex2wiki/getting_started > > * Question 1:i use ubuntu 11.10 ,is this ok?* Yes. > * Question2:in the getting_started it said rtrmgr will load the configuration from file installdir/etc/xorp.conf,so i think it should in > /usr/local/xorp/etc/xorp.conf but after installation i don't have /usr/local/xorp/etc what i have is just lib sbin share,is it ok? or i didn't install > successful?* It might depend on how (or if) you install it. I always use command-line-arg to specify the xorp config file in my testing... > * Question3 : why there are so many WARNING like this,is there anything wrong ? or this is not important .* > [ 2013/05/22 03:13:04.46458 WARNING xorp_rtrmgr:1692 XrlFinderTarget obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/xrl/targets/finder_base.cc:1135 handle_finder_0_2_resolve_xrl ] > Handling method for finder/0.2/resolve_xrl failed: XrlCmdError 102 Command failed Target "rib" does not exist or is not enabled. > [ 2013/05/22 03:13:04.46688 WARNING xorp_rtrmgr:1692 RTRMGR rtrmgr/task.cc:215 xrl_done ] Failed to receive reply, code: 201 Resolve failed retries: 0 > max_retries: 30 I think those warnings are not a real problem. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com From dimashink at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 02:10:58 2013 From: dimashink at gmail.com (=?KOI8-R?B?+8nOy8HS1csg5M3J1NLJyg==?=) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:10:58 +0400 Subject: [Xorp-users] Fwd: Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry In-Reply-To: References: <54DD4F682C240845BF5F7D0EECBDB6F2089B81AF@EXDB3.ug.kth.se> <54DD4F682C240845BF5F7D0EECBDB6F2089B81C4@EXDB3.ug.kth.se> Message-ID: Oh yeah! Before I set rp_filter flags like this: echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth1/rp_filter and so on for all interfaces. I've just tried to set flag /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/default/rp_filter to 0, as you suggested, but this didn't help. Then I set flag /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/rp_filter to 0, and Receiver started to receive packets. Thank you very much! 2013/6/3 Dan Rosenqvist > Hi, > > > > Have you checked /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward is set to 1 and that > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/default/rp_filter is set to 0 for all interfaces > and routers? > > > > I've had some strange behaviour regarding these two (especially the rp > filter). > > > > Regards, > > Dan > > ------------------------------ > > *Fr?n:* ???????? ??????? [dimashink at gmail.com] > *Skickat:* den 3 juni 2013 12:14 > *Till:* Dan Rosenqvist > *?mne:* Re: [Xorp-users] Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry > > Hi Dan, > Unicast routing is enabled on all routers, and every router can ping each > other. This problem occurs even if I ommit xorp_router_1, so Receiver is > directly connected to xorp_router_2 - no mfc entries are inserted. But > 'show pim join' shows that everything is OK. > I am surprised that xorp_router_3 inserts mfc entry and sends packets to > xorp_router_2 (tcpdump shows that) but they do not go through xorp_router_2. > > > > > 2013/6/3 Dan Rosenqvist > >> Hi, >> >> Is unicast routing activated on your routers and in that case can you >> provide your uc routing tables? >> >> Pim uses the uc routing table to forward mc frames. >> >> Regards, >> Dan >> ________________________________________ >> Fr?n: xorp-users-bounces at xorp.org [xorp-users-bounces at xorp.org] för >> ???????? ??????? [dimashink at gmail.com] >> Skickat: den 2 juni 2013 22:03 >> Till: xorp-users at xorp.org >> ?mne: [Xorp-users] Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry >> >> Hello, >> I am trying to make xorp multicast routing work with the following >> network configuration: >> >> Receiver (10.1.2.2) ------ (10.1.2.1) xorp_router_1 (10.1.3.1) ------- >> (10.1.3.2) xorp_router_2 (10.1.4.1) ------- (10.1.4.2) xorp_router_3 >> (10.1.1.1) ------ Sender (10.1.1.2) >> >> Sender and receiver use VLC for sending and receiving multicast traffic >> respectively. >> Every xorp_router has similar XORP configuration files: >> >> interfaces { >> restore-original-config-on-shutdown: false >> interface eth2 { >> disable: false >> default-system-config >> } >> interface eth3 { >> disable: false >> default-system-config >> } >> >> } >> >> fea { >> unicast-forwarding4 { >> disable: true >> } >> } >> >> plumbing { >> mfea4 { >> disable: false >> interface eth2 { >> vif eth2 { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> interface eth3 { >> vif eth3 { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> interface register_vif { >> vif register_vif { >> /* Note: this vif should be always enabled */ >> disable: false >> } >> } >> traceoptions { >> flag all { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> } >> >> } >> >> protocols { >> igmp { >> disable: false >> interface eth2 { >> vif eth2 { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> interface eth3 { >> vif eth3 { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> traceoptions { >> flag all { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> } >> } >> >> protocols { >> pimsm4 { >> disable: false >> interface eth2 { >> vif eth2 { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> interface eth3 { >> vif eth3 { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> >> interface register_vif { >> vif register_vif { >> /* Note: this vif should be always enabled */ >> disable: false >> } >> } >> >> static-rps { >> rp 10.1.4.2 { >> group-prefix 224.0.0.0/4 { >> >> } >> } >> } >> traceoptions { >> flag all { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> } >> >> } >> >> protocols { >> fib2mrib { >> disable: false >> } >> } >> >> When I start stream sender and receiver I can see following output on >> routers: >> >> For XORP_ROUTER_1 >> >> root at xorp_router_1> show pim join >> Group Source RP Flags >> 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 WC >> Upstream interface (RP): eth2 >> Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): 10.1.3.2 >> Upstream RPF'(*,G): 10.1.3.2 >> Upstream state: Joined >> Join timer: 52 >> Local receiver include WC: .O. >> Joins RP: ... >> Joins WC: ... >> Join state: ... >> Prune state: ... >> Prune pending state: ... >> I am assert winner state: ... >> I am assert loser state: ... >> Assert winner WC: ... >> Assert lost WC: ... >> Assert tracking WC: OO. >> Could assert WC: .O. >> I am DR: .OO >> Immediate olist RP: ... >> Immediate olist WC: .O. >> Inherited olist SG: .O. >> Inherited olist SG_RPT: .O. >> PIM include WC: .O. >> >> root at xorp_router_1> show pim mfc >> Group Source RP >> >> root at xorp_router_1> show mfea dataflow >> Group Source >> >> root at xorp_router_1> show igmp group >> Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State >> eth2 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 250 2 E >> eth2 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 251 2 E >> eth2 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 254 2 E >> eth3 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 255 2 E >> eth3 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 254 2 E >> eth3 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 251 2 E >> eth3 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.2 255 2 E >> >> For XORP_ROUTER_2 >> >> root at xorp_router_2> show pim join >> Group Source RP Flags >> 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 WC >> Upstream interface (RP): eth9 >> Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): 10.1.4.2 >> Upstream RPF'(*,G): 10.1.4.2 >> Upstream state: Joined >> Join timer: 46 >> Local receiver include WC: ... >> Joins RP: ... >> Joins WC: O.. >> Join state: O.. >> Prune state: ... >> Prune pending state: ... >> I am assert winner state: ... >> I am assert loser state: ... >> Assert winner WC: ... >> Assert lost WC: ... >> Assert tracking WC: OO. >> Could assert WC: O.. >> I am DR: O.O >> Immediate olist RP: ... >> Immediate olist WC: O.. >> Inherited olist SG: O.. >> Inherited olist SG_RPT: O.. >> PIM include WC: ... >> >> root at xorp_router_2> show pim mfc >> Group Source RP >> >> root at xorp_router_2> show mfea dataflow >> Group Source >> >> root at xorp_router_2> show igmp group >> Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State >> eth8 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 242 2 E >> eth8 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 246 2 E >> eth8 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 248 2 E >> eth9 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 257 2 E >> eth9 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 259 2 E >> eth9 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 256 2 E >> >> For XORP_ROUTER_3 >> >> root at xorp_router_3> show pim join >> Group Source RP Flags >> --------- Some lines are skipped------------ >> 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 10.1.4.2 SG SPT DirectlyConnectedS >> Upstream interface (S): eth11 >> Upstream interface (RP): register_vif >> Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): UNKNOWN >> Upstream MRIB next hop (S): UNKNOWN >> Upstream RPF'(S,G): UNKNOWN >> Upstream state: Joined >> Register state: RegisterNoinfo RegisterNotCouldRegister >> Join timer: 40 >> KAT(S,G) running: true >> Local receiver include WC: ... >> Local receiver include SG: ... >> Local receiver exclude SG: ... >> Joins RP: ... >> Joins WC: O.. >> Joins SG: ... >> Join state: ... >> Prune state: ... >> Prune pending state: ... >> I am assert winner state: ... >> I am assert loser state: ... >> Assert winner WC: ... >> Assert winner SG: ... >> Assert lost WC: ... >> Assert lost SG: ... >> Assert lost SG_RPT: ... >> Assert tracking SG: OO. >> Could assert WC: O.. >> Could assert SG: O.. >> I am DR: OOO >> Immediate olist RP: ... >> Immediate olist WC: O.. >> Immediate olist SG: ... >> Inherited olist SG: O.. >> Inherited olist SG_RPT: O.. >> PIM include WC: ... >> PIM include SG: ... >> PIM exclude SG: ... >> >> root at xorp_router_3> show pim mfc >> Group Source RP >> 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 10.1.4.2 >> Incoming interface : eth11 >> Outgoing interfaces: O.. >> >> root at xorp_router_3> show mfea dataflow >> Group Source >> 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 >> Measured(Start|Packets|Bytes) Type Thresh(Interval|Packets|Bytes) Remain >> 4448.914180|0|? <= 210.0|0|? >> 159.890042 >> >> root at xorp_router_3> show igmp group >> Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State >> eth10 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 248 2 E >> eth10 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 250 2 E >> eth10 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 248 2 E >> eth11 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 255 2 E >> eth11 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 138 2 E >> eth11 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 259 2 E >> >> Moreover, on xorp_router_3 in logs I can see records about adding entry >> to MFEA. But there are no such records in logs on xorp_router_1 and 2: >> --------------Skipped lines-------------------- >> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76422 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] RX PIM_JOIN_PRUNE >> from 10.1.4.1 to 224.0.0.13 on vif eth10 >> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76729 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] Add MFC entry: >> (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. olist_disable_wrongvif = ..O >> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76893 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] Add MFC entry: >> (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. olist_disable_wrongvif = .OO >> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.77098 TRACE xorp_fea:2032 MFEA >> fea/mfea_mrouter.cc:1568 add_mfc ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) >> iif = 1 olist = O.. >> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.77362 TRACE xorp_fea:2032 MFEA >> fea/mfea_mrouter.cc:1568 add_mfc ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) >> iif = 1 olist = O.. >> --------------Skipped lines-------------------- >> >> What's wrong with this configuration? Why second and third routers don't >> add entries to mfc? >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-users/attachments/20130605/cccc3cf5/attachment-0001.html From dimashink at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 02:17:40 2013 From: dimashink at gmail.com (=?KOI8-R?B?+8nOy8HS1csg5M3J1NLJyg==?=) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:17:40 +0400 Subject: [Xorp-users] Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry In-Reply-To: References: <54DD4F682C240845BF5F7D0EECBDB6F2089B81AF@EXDB3.ug.kth.se> <54DD4F682C240845BF5F7D0EECBDB6F2089B81C4@EXDB3.ug.kth.se> Message-ID: 2013/6/3 ???????? ??????? > Oh yeah! > Before I set rp_filter flags like this: > > echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth1/rp_filter > > and so on for all interfaces. > I've just tried to set flag /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/default/rp_filter to > 0, as you suggested, but this didn't help. > > Then I set flag /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/rp_filter to 0, and Receiver > started to receive packets. > > Thank you very much! > > > > 2013/6/3 Dan Rosenqvist > >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Have you checked /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward is set to 1 and that >> /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/default/rp_filter is set to 0 for all interfaces >> and routers? >> >> >> >> I've had some strange behaviour regarding these two (especially the rp >> filter). >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Dan >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *Fr?n:* ???????? ??????? [dimashink at gmail.com] >> *Skickat:* den 3 juni 2013 12:14 >> *Till:* Dan Rosenqvist >> *?mne:* Re: [Xorp-users] Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry >> >> Hi Dan, >> Unicast routing is enabled on all routers, and every router can ping each >> other. This problem occurs even if I ommit xorp_router_1, so Receiver is >> directly connected to xorp_router_2 - no mfc entries are inserted. But >> 'show pim join' shows that everything is OK. >> I am surprised that xorp_router_3 inserts mfc entry and sends packets to >> xorp_router_2 (tcpdump shows that) but they do not go through xorp_router_2. >> >> >> >> >> 2013/6/3 Dan Rosenqvist >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is unicast routing activated on your routers and in that case can you >>> provide your uc routing tables? >>> >>> Pim uses the uc routing table to forward mc frames. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dan >>> ________________________________________ >>> Fr?n: xorp-users-bounces at xorp.org [xorp-users-bounces at xorp.org] >>> för ???????? ??????? [dimashink at gmail.com] >>> Skickat: den 2 juni 2013 22:03 >>> Till: xorp-users at xorp.org >>> ?mne: [Xorp-users] Second router in a chain does not add mfc entry >>> >>> Hello, >>> I am trying to make xorp multicast routing work with the following >>> network configuration: >>> >>> Receiver (10.1.2.2) ------ (10.1.2.1) xorp_router_1 (10.1.3.1) ------- >>> (10.1.3.2) xorp_router_2 (10.1.4.1) ------- (10.1.4.2) xorp_router_3 >>> (10.1.1.1) ------ Sender (10.1.1.2) >>> >>> Sender and receiver use VLC for sending and receiving multicast traffic >>> respectively. >>> Every xorp_router has similar XORP configuration files: >>> >>> interfaces { >>> restore-original-config-on-shutdown: false >>> interface eth2 { >>> disable: false >>> default-system-config >>> } >>> interface eth3 { >>> disable: false >>> default-system-config >>> } >>> >>> } >>> >>> fea { >>> unicast-forwarding4 { >>> disable: true >>> } >>> } >>> >>> plumbing { >>> mfea4 { >>> disable: false >>> interface eth2 { >>> vif eth2 { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> interface eth3 { >>> vif eth3 { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> interface register_vif { >>> vif register_vif { >>> /* Note: this vif should be always enabled */ >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> traceoptions { >>> flag all { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> } >>> >>> } >>> >>> protocols { >>> igmp { >>> disable: false >>> interface eth2 { >>> vif eth2 { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> interface eth3 { >>> vif eth3 { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> traceoptions { >>> flag all { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> } >>> } >>> >>> protocols { >>> pimsm4 { >>> disable: false >>> interface eth2 { >>> vif eth2 { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> interface eth3 { >>> vif eth3 { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> >>> interface register_vif { >>> vif register_vif { >>> /* Note: this vif should be always enabled */ >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> >>> static-rps { >>> rp 10.1.4.2 { >>> group-prefix 224.0.0.0/4 { >>> >>> } >>> } >>> } >>> traceoptions { >>> flag all { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> } >>> >>> } >>> >>> protocols { >>> fib2mrib { >>> disable: false >>> } >>> } >>> >>> When I start stream sender and receiver I can see following output on >>> routers: >>> >>> For XORP_ROUTER_1 >>> >>> root at xorp_router_1> show pim join >>> Group Source RP Flags >>> 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 WC >>> Upstream interface (RP): eth2 >>> Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): 10.1.3.2 >>> Upstream RPF'(*,G): 10.1.3.2 >>> Upstream state: Joined >>> Join timer: 52 >>> Local receiver include WC: .O. >>> Joins RP: ... >>> Joins WC: ... >>> Join state: ... >>> Prune state: ... >>> Prune pending state: ... >>> I am assert winner state: ... >>> I am assert loser state: ... >>> Assert winner WC: ... >>> Assert lost WC: ... >>> Assert tracking WC: OO. >>> Could assert WC: .O. >>> I am DR: .OO >>> Immediate olist RP: ... >>> Immediate olist WC: .O. >>> Inherited olist SG: .O. >>> Inherited olist SG_RPT: .O. >>> PIM include WC: .O. >>> >>> root at xorp_router_1> show pim mfc >>> Group Source RP >>> >>> root at xorp_router_1> show mfea dataflow >>> Group Source >>> >>> root at xorp_router_1> show igmp group >>> Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State >>> eth2 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 250 2 E >>> eth2 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 251 2 E >>> eth2 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 254 2 E >>> eth3 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 255 2 E >>> eth3 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 254 2 E >>> eth3 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.1 251 2 E >>> eth3 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.2 255 2 E >>> >>> For XORP_ROUTER_2 >>> >>> root at xorp_router_2> show pim join >>> Group Source RP Flags >>> 230.230.230.1 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 WC >>> Upstream interface (RP): eth9 >>> Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): 10.1.4.2 >>> Upstream RPF'(*,G): 10.1.4.2 >>> Upstream state: Joined >>> Join timer: 46 >>> Local receiver include WC: ... >>> Joins RP: ... >>> Joins WC: O.. >>> Join state: O.. >>> Prune state: ... >>> Prune pending state: ... >>> I am assert winner state: ... >>> I am assert loser state: ... >>> Assert winner WC: ... >>> Assert lost WC: ... >>> Assert tracking WC: OO. >>> Could assert WC: O.. >>> I am DR: O.O >>> Immediate olist RP: ... >>> Immediate olist WC: O.. >>> Inherited olist SG: O.. >>> Inherited olist SG_RPT: O.. >>> PIM include WC: ... >>> >>> root at xorp_router_2> show pim mfc >>> Group Source RP >>> >>> root at xorp_router_2> show mfea dataflow >>> Group Source >>> >>> root at xorp_router_2> show igmp group >>> Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State >>> eth8 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 242 2 E >>> eth8 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 246 2 E >>> eth8 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2 248 2 E >>> eth9 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 257 2 E >>> eth9 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 259 2 E >>> eth9 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 256 2 E >>> >>> For XORP_ROUTER_3 >>> >>> root at xorp_router_3> show pim join >>> Group Source RP Flags >>> --------- Some lines are skipped------------ >>> 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 10.1.4.2 SG SPT DirectlyConnectedS >>> Upstream interface (S): eth11 >>> Upstream interface (RP): register_vif >>> Upstream MRIB next hop (RP): UNKNOWN >>> Upstream MRIB next hop (S): UNKNOWN >>> Upstream RPF'(S,G): UNKNOWN >>> Upstream state: Joined >>> Register state: RegisterNoinfo RegisterNotCouldRegister >>> Join timer: 40 >>> KAT(S,G) running: true >>> Local receiver include WC: ... >>> Local receiver include SG: ... >>> Local receiver exclude SG: ... >>> Joins RP: ... >>> Joins WC: O.. >>> Joins SG: ... >>> Join state: ... >>> Prune state: ... >>> Prune pending state: ... >>> I am assert winner state: ... >>> I am assert loser state: ... >>> Assert winner WC: ... >>> Assert winner SG: ... >>> Assert lost WC: ... >>> Assert lost SG: ... >>> Assert lost SG_RPT: ... >>> Assert tracking SG: OO. >>> Could assert WC: O.. >>> Could assert SG: O.. >>> I am DR: OOO >>> Immediate olist RP: ... >>> Immediate olist WC: O.. >>> Immediate olist SG: ... >>> Inherited olist SG: O.. >>> Inherited olist SG_RPT: O.. >>> PIM include WC: ... >>> PIM include SG: ... >>> PIM exclude SG: ... >>> >>> root at xorp_router_3> show pim mfc >>> Group Source RP >>> 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 10.1.4.2 >>> Incoming interface : eth11 >>> Outgoing interfaces: O.. >>> >>> root at xorp_router_3> show mfea dataflow >>> Group Source >>> 230.230.230.1 10.1.1.2 >>> Measured(Start|Packets|Bytes) Type Thresh(Interval|Packets|Bytes) >>> Remain >>> 4448.914180|0|? <= 210.0|0|? >>> 159.890042 >>> >>> root at xorp_router_3> show igmp group >>> Interface Group Source LastReported Timeout V State >>> eth10 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 248 2 E >>> eth10 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.2 250 2 E >>> eth10 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.4.1 248 2 E >>> eth11 224.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 255 2 E >>> eth11 224.0.0.13 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 138 2 E >>> eth11 224.0.0.22 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 259 2 E >>> >>> Moreover, on xorp_router_3 in logs I can see records about adding entry >>> to MFEA. But there are no such records in logs on xorp_router_1 and 2: >>> --------------Skipped lines-------------------- >>> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76422 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] RX PIM_JOIN_PRUNE >>> from 10.1.4.1 to 224.0.0.13 on vif eth10 >>> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76729 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] Add MFC entry: >>> (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. olist_disable_wrongvif = ..O >>> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.76893 TRACE xorp_pimsm4 PIM ] Add MFC entry: >>> (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) iif = 1 olist = O.. olist_disable_wrongvif = .OO >>> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.77098 TRACE xorp_fea:2032 MFEA >>> fea/mfea_mrouter.cc:1568 add_mfc ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) >>> iif = 1 olist = O.. >>> [ 2013/06/02 23:58:12.77362 TRACE xorp_fea:2032 MFEA >>> fea/mfea_mrouter.cc:1568 add_mfc ] Add MFC entry: (10.1.1.2, 230.230.230.1) >>> iif = 1 olist = O.. >>> --------------Skipped lines-------------------- >>> >>> What's wrong with this configuration? Why second and third routers don't >>> add entries to mfc? >>> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-users/attachments/20130605/4acc402f/attachment-0001.html From krivokapic.bogdan10 at gmail.com Fri Jun 21 04:33:42 2013 From: krivokapic.bogdan10 at gmail.com (Bogdan Krivokapic) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:33:42 +0200 Subject: [Xorp-users] Problem with XORP RIP packet loss Message-ID: I am trying to test the RIP convergence time using the following network configuration: *host1*---net1---*router1*---net2---*router2*---net3---*host2* | | | | net4 net5 | | |-----*router3*---- -| net1: (10.10.10.50)---(10.10.10.1) net2: (192.168.10.1)----(192.168.10.2) net3: (172.16.10.1)-------(172.16.10.50) net4: (10.0.0.1)-----(10.0.0.2) net5: (10.0.1.2)-----(10.0.1.1) Every router has a simple configuration file. For example, the configuration file on router1 is: protocols{ rip { interface eth0 { vif eth0 { address 10.10.10.1 { metric: 1 horizon: "split-horizon-poison-reverse" disable: false passive: false accept-non-rip-request: true accept-default-route: true advertise-default-route: true route-timeout: 180 deletion-delay: 120 triggered-delay: 120 triggered-jitter: 66 update-interval: 30 update-jitter: 16 request-interval: 30 interpacket-delay: 50 } } } interface eth1 { vif eth1 { address 192.168.10.1 { metric: 1 horizon: "split-horizon-poison-reverse" disable: false passive: false accept-non-rip-request: true accept-default-route: true advertise-default-route: true route-timeout: 180 deletion-delay: 120 triggered-delay: 120 triggered-jitter: 66 update-interval: 30 update-jitter: 16 request-interval: 30 interpacket-delay: 50 } } } interface eth2 { vif eth2 { address 10.0.0.1 { metric: 1 horizon: "split-horizon-poison-reverse" disable: false passive: false accept-non-rip-request: true accept-default-route: true advertise-default-route: true route-timeout: 180 deletion-delay: 120 triggered-delay: 120 triggered-jitter: 66 update-interval: 30 update-jitter: 16 request-interval: 30 interpacket-delay: 50 } } } export: "connected" } } policy { policy-statement connected { term export { from { protocol: "connected" } } } } fea { unicast-forwarding4 { disable: false } } interfaces { interface eth0 { disable: false discard: false vif eth0 { disable: false address: 10.10.10.1 { prefix-length: 24 broadcast: 10.10.10.255 disable: false } } } interface eth1 { disable: false discard: false vif eth1 { disable: false address: 192.168.10.1 { prefix-length: 24 broadcast: 192.168.10.255 disable: false } } } interface eth2 { disable: false discard: false vif eth2 { disable: false address: 10.0.0.1 { prefix-length: 24 broadcast: 10.0.0.255 disable: false } } } } I used the following procedure: First i started ping command from host1 to host2 on 172.16.10.50 and then disabled router1 interface 192.168.10.1. After all RIP timers expired router1 started routing through router3. But then problems appeared. Again i started ping from host1 to host2. After bringing the interface 192.168.10.1 back in action host1 showed packet loss. Router1 immediately learned route to 172.16.10.0 through router2. Router1 routing table was showing that packets are routed through router2. At the same time router2 routing table was showing that router2 reaches network 10.10.10.0 by routing through router3, but packets from host1 were somehow lost. My question is why? This packet loss continues until router2 learnes a shorter route to 10.10.10.0 through periodic update. Another strange thing is that when i ping from router1 to host2 at the same time there is no packet loss, also when i ping from router2 to host1 there is no packet loss. And at the end when i ping from host1 to interface 10.0.1.1 which belongs to router2 there is no packet loss. I also tried quagga and i had the same problem. Why is there packet loss when i ping from host1 to host2 in the moment when i enable interface on router1 until router2 stops routing through router3? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-users/attachments/20130621/b31989e2/attachment.html