Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:25:58 -0800 From: Michael DeMan <michael@staff.openaccess.org> To: Dima Dorfman <dd@freebsd.org> Cc: Bart Van Kerckhove <bart@it-ss.be>, "freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OT - Quagga/CARP Message-ID: <EBB415E0-789D-48A5-B281-FA9BE5739930@staff.openaccess.org> In-Reply-To: <20060325092123.GB5468@trit.org> References: <C935A1DF-4F65-4D5A-991B-B8A6C7E7DE24@staff.openaccess.org> <014e01c64928$6107abd0$020b000a@bartwrkstxp> <20060316193740.GE11850@spc.org> <C9011224-BE2F-4946-A90A-60C7A48D080E@staff.openaccess.org> <20060325092123.GB5468@trit.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, The issue I have is that FreeBSD will not allow quagga to configure an additional interface on the local system if already exists in the routing table. So, if you already have a route to 10.100.100.0/24 via OSPF to another machine, then try to... ip address 10.100.100.55/24 You get an error. It is possible to force the interface configuration via 'ifconfig' on the UNIX command line, but for this equipment I want all interface configuration and routing driven out of Quagga. Michael F. DeMan Director of Technology OpenAccess Network Services Bellingham, WA 98225 michael@staff.openaccess.org 360-647-0785 On Mar 25, 2006, at 1:21 AM, Dima Dorfman wrote: > Michael DeMan <michael@staff.openaccess.org> wrote: >> Anyway, thanks very much for the information. I'm going to have to >> figure out some kind of workaround on my architecture. In the worst >> case, I can shut off OSPF on the edge routers and use static routes >> upstream and OSPF from there, but that is going to be a real >> nightmare for network maintenance over the long haul. > > You're talking about using CARP and OSPF on the edge routers, right? > > Can you explain a little more why CARP and zebra/ospfd don't play well > together? I understand the problem about having two copies of the same > route in the FIB, but I don't think it should prevent redundancy from > working. I am planning to deploy FreeBSD-based access routers in the > near future, and I'd like to have an idea of what issues I'll be > facing. > > The scenario I have in mind is two FreeBSD boxes connected to the rest > of the network on one side and clients (using carp) on the other. CARP > is supposed to protect the client against one of the routers failing. > I tried this on some test boxes today, and it looks like it should > work. Both boxes are configured as OSPF neighbors and share a CARP > vhid. When both links are up, each router has a route through the > physical interface (it also sees the OSPF route, but the connected > route is better). If one of the links fails (any condition that causes > the physical interface to be down), the routes are withdrawn, the > other box takes over the VIP, and the first box installs the OSPF > route. Everything is still reachable. > > Am I missing an obvious problem or a case where this doesn't work?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EBB415E0-789D-48A5-B281-FA9BE5739930>