On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 23:04 +0200, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: > > Tried a small interop by loading bird 2.0.4 on node 2 and Quagga > > 0.99.11 on node 3 (the Quagga build has the unnumbered patch mentioned > > by Jocke). Results looks correct as far as I can tell. > > > > Seems like that patch is also part of FRR; > > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FFRRouting%2Ffrr%2Fcommit%2Fc81ee5c94f&data=02%7C01%7CKenth.Eriksson%40infinera.com%7C630dfc1f3cd542e6263408d800ef4369%7C285643de5f5b4b03a1530ae2dc8aaf77%7C1%7C0%7C637260374926746579&sdata=B%2FjY%2Fi06o2Lzg0zAFE3WgBu5kBWApIGRnrzkPpUys2E%3D&reserved=0 > > > > And it still looks like at least the functions are there in latest FRR > > 7.3.1. > > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FFRRouting%2Ffrr%2Fblob%2Ffrr-7.3.1%2Fospfd%2Fospf_interface.c%23L393&data=02%7C01%7CKenth.Eriksson%40infinera.com%7C630dfc1f3cd542e6263408d800ef4369%7C285643de5f5b4b03a1530ae2dc8aaf77%7C1%7C0%7C637260374926746579&sdata=q3B2op7fe9f8e%2FL4WHw6TqroFtCE5gXi71V6QdtY88k%3D&reserved=0 > > Hi > > Checked that. Seems like FRR uses the similar approach like BIRD 2.0.4, > so that is OK. It also seems that FRR does not implement OSPF graceful > restart, so they did not (yet) hit the same issue with Jocke's patch like > we in 2.0.5.
The development of OSPF graceful restart in bird is a good first step. But I believe most use cases would need unplanned GR. If you are limited to a planned GR, you probably have a service window anyway. > > > Haven't actually tested if this actually interops with bird. > > > > The RFC states that unnumbered ptp links shall use ifIndex, whereas as > > numbered ptp links shall use IP interface address. Any reason to not > > follow the RFC? > > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Frfc2328%23page-130&data=02%7C01%7CKenth.Eriksson%40infinera.com%7C630dfc1f3cd542e6263408d800ef4369%7C285643de5f5b4b03a1530ae2dc8aaf77%7C1%7C0%7C637260374926746579&sdata=ELhNbVgkTrU4EOVzBsjESQSoPyiuWNs6QKPStsENC5M%3D&reserved=0 > > Well, i generally prefer not to make intentional changes that break > existing setups, and switching to this (as done by the patch i sent) > would break Mikrotik compatibility for unnumbered PtP links (due to > Mikrotik broken SPF calculation). > Not sure I agree the alternative is better. Violating standard to maintain interoperability with a broken Mikrotik implementation. That only makes sense if the Mikrotik way of doing it was de facto standard. If not, drop compatibility. > > > Ondrej, what are you plans for the patch provided? Good to go for > > master? > > Seems to me that perhaps the least painful solution is to use 2.0.4 > approach (position based) for regular OSPF, and switch to ifIndex/data > based approach (like the patch) when OSPF graceful restart is enabled. So does that mean that there is a bird interop issue for nodes running with and without GR activated? > > So plan is to make a new/different patch for master. > >
