* IPv6 multicast with VRF @ 2022-04-20 16:54 Vladimir Oltean 2022-04-20 18:59 ` David Ahern 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Vladimir Oltean @ 2022-04-20 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Ahern; +Cc: netdev Hi, I don't have experience with either IPv6 multicast or VRF, yet I need to send some IPv6 multicast packets from a device enslaved to a VRF, and I don't really know what's wrong with the routing table setup. The system is configured in the following way: ip link set dev eth0 up # The kernel kindly creates a ff00::/8 route for IPv6 multicast traffic # in the local table, and I think this is what makes multicast route # lookups find the egress device. ip -6 route show table local local ::1 dev lo proto kernel metric 0 pref medium local fe80::204:9fff:fe05:f4ab dev eth0 proto kernel metric 0 pref medium multicast ff00::/8 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium ip -6 route get ff02::1 multicast ff02::1 dev eth0 table local proto kernel src fe80::204:9fff:fe05:f4ab metric 256 pref medium ip link add dev vrf0 type vrf table 3 && ip link set dev vrf0 up ip -4 route add table 3 unreachable default metric 4278198272 ip -6 route add table 3 unreachable default metric 4278198272 ip link set dev eth0 master vrf0 The problem seems to be that, although the "ff00::/8 dev eth0" route migrates from table 255 to table 3, route lookups after this point fail to find it and return -ENETUNREACH (ip6_null_entry). ip -6 route show table local local ::1 dev lo proto kernel metric 0 pref medium ip -6 route show table main ::1 dev lo proto kernel metric 256 pref medium ip -6 route show table 3 local fe80::204:9fff:fe05:f4ab dev eth0 proto kernel metric 0 pref medium fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium multicast ff00::/8 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium unreachable default dev lo metric 4278198272 pref medium ip -6 route get ff02::1 RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable ip -6 route get vrf vrf0 ff02::1 RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable I'm not exactly sure what is missing? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: IPv6 multicast with VRF 2022-04-20 16:54 IPv6 multicast with VRF Vladimir Oltean @ 2022-04-20 18:59 ` David Ahern 2022-04-20 19:18 ` Vladimir Oltean 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: David Ahern @ 2022-04-20 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vladimir Oltean; +Cc: netdev On 4/20/22 10:54 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > Hi, > > I don't have experience with either IPv6 multicast or VRF, yet I need to > send some IPv6 multicast packets from a device enslaved to a VRF, and I > don't really know what's wrong with the routing table setup. > > The system is configured in the following way: > > ip link set dev eth0 up > > # The kernel kindly creates a ff00::/8 route for IPv6 multicast traffic > # in the local table, and I think this is what makes multicast route > # lookups find the egress device. > ip -6 route show table local > local ::1 dev lo proto kernel metric 0 pref medium > local fe80::204:9fff:fe05:f4ab dev eth0 proto kernel metric 0 pref medium > multicast ff00::/8 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium > > ip -6 route get ff02::1 > multicast ff02::1 dev eth0 table local proto kernel src fe80::204:9fff:fe05:f4ab metric 256 pref medium > > ip link add dev vrf0 type vrf table 3 && ip link set dev vrf0 up > > ip -4 route add table 3 unreachable default metric 4278198272 > > ip -6 route add table 3 unreachable default metric 4278198272 > > ip link set dev eth0 master vrf0 > > The problem seems to be that, although the "ff00::/8 dev eth0" route > migrates from table 255 to table 3, route lookups after this point fail > to find it and return -ENETUNREACH (ip6_null_entry). > > ip -6 route show table local > local ::1 dev lo proto kernel metric 0 pref medium > > ip -6 route show table main > ::1 dev lo proto kernel metric 256 pref medium > > ip -6 route show table 3 > local fe80::204:9fff:fe05:f4ab dev eth0 proto kernel metric 0 pref medium > fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium > multicast ff00::/8 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium > unreachable default dev lo metric 4278198272 pref medium > > ip -6 route get ff02::1 > RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable > > ip -6 route get vrf vrf0 ff02::1 > RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable > > I'm not exactly sure what is missing? Did you adjust the FIB rules? See the documentation in the kernel repo. And add a device scope to the `get`. e.g., ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: IPv6 multicast with VRF 2022-04-20 18:59 ` David Ahern @ 2022-04-20 19:18 ` Vladimir Oltean 2022-04-20 20:40 ` David Ahern 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Vladimir Oltean @ 2022-04-20 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Ahern; +Cc: netdev On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:59:45PM -0600, David Ahern wrote: > Did you adjust the FIB rules? See the documentation in the kernel repo. Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "adjusting". I tried various forms of adding an IPv6 multicast route on eth0, to multiple tables, some routes more generic and some more specific, and none seem to match when eth0 is under a VRF, for a reason I don't really know. This does not occur with IPv4 multicast, by the way. By documentation I think you mean Documentation/networking/vrf.rst. I went through it but I didn't notice something that would make me realize what the issue is. > And add a device scope to the `get`. e.g., > > ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 I'm probably not understanding this, because: ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 Error: inet6 prefix is expected rather than "ff02::1%eth0". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: IPv6 multicast with VRF 2022-04-20 19:18 ` Vladimir Oltean @ 2022-04-20 20:40 ` David Ahern 2022-04-21 9:24 ` Vladimir Oltean 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: David Ahern @ 2022-04-20 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vladimir Oltean; +Cc: netdev On 4/20/22 1:18 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:59:45PM -0600, David Ahern wrote: >> Did you adjust the FIB rules? See the documentation in the kernel repo. > > Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "adjusting". I tried various > forms of adding an IPv6 multicast route on eth0, to multiple tables, > some routes more generic and some more specific, and none seem to match > when eth0 is under a VRF, for a reason I don't really know. This does > not occur with IPv4 multicast, by the way. > > By documentation I think you mean Documentation/networking/vrf.rst. > I went through it but I didn't notice something that would make me > realize what the issue is. try this: https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/ossna2017/fe/vrf-tutorial-oss.pdf slide 79 and on > >> And add a device scope to the `get`. e.g., >> >> ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 > > I'm probably not understanding this, because: > > ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 > Error: inet6 prefix is expected rather than "ff02::1%eth0". ip -6 ro get oif eth0 ff02::1 (too many syntax differences between tools) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: IPv6 multicast with VRF 2022-04-20 20:40 ` David Ahern @ 2022-04-21 9:24 ` Vladimir Oltean 2022-04-21 23:44 ` David Ahern 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Vladimir Oltean @ 2022-04-21 9:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Ahern; +Cc: netdev On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 02:40:53PM -0600, David Ahern wrote: > On 4/20/22 1:18 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:59:45PM -0600, David Ahern wrote: > >> Did you adjust the FIB rules? See the documentation in the kernel repo. > > > > Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "adjusting". I tried various > > forms of adding an IPv6 multicast route on eth0, to multiple tables, > > some routes more generic and some more specific, and none seem to match > > when eth0 is under a VRF, for a reason I don't really know. This does > > not occur with IPv4 multicast, by the way. > > > > By documentation I think you mean Documentation/networking/vrf.rst. > > I went through it but I didn't notice something that would make me > > realize what the issue is. > > try this: > https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/ossna2017/fe/vrf-tutorial-oss.pdf > slide 79 and on Yeah, that worked. Well, now I know what vrf_prepare() and vrf_cleanup() from tools/testing/selfteste/net/forwarding/lib.sh are for, I guess.. Thanks for helping and for sharing the presentation. > >> And add a device scope to the `get`. e.g., > >> > >> ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 > > > > I'm probably not understanding this, because: > > > > ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 > > Error: inet6 prefix is expected rather than "ff02::1%eth0". > > ip -6 ro get oif eth0 ff02::1 > > (too many syntax differences between tools) Could you explain why specifying the oif is needed here? If I don't do it, I still can't find the route. Either that, or what would an application need to do to find the route from the VRF FIB? ip -6 route get vrf vrf0 ff02::1 RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable ip -6 route get vrf vrf0 ff02::1 oif eth0 multicast ff02::1 dev eth0 table 3 proto kernel src 2001:db8:1::1 metric 256 pref medium For some context, the multicast application I'm trying to get running in a VRF is mcjoin (https://github.com/troglobit/mcjoin). It will send packets as long as the interface only has a link-local IPv6 address. As long as I add a global IPv6 address *and* the netdev is in the VRF (basically the circumstances from the forwarding selftests), sendto() fails with -ENETUNREACH. ip vrf exec vrf0 mcjoin -s -o -i eth0 ff0e::1 -c 1 Sending IPv6 multicast on eth0 addr, fe80::201:2ff:fe03:401 ifindex: 10, sd: 6 *,ff0e::1: invalid 0 delay 0 gaps 0 reorder 0 dupes 0 bytes 100 packets 1 Total: 1 packets vs: ip addr add 2001:db8:1::1/64 dev eth0 ip vrf exec vrf0 mcjoin -s -o -i eth0 ff0e::1 -c 1 Sending IPv6 multicast on eth0 addr, 2001:db8:1::1 ifindex: 10, sd: 6 Failed sending mcast to ff2e::1: Network is unreachable *,ff2e::1: invalid 0 delay 0 gaps 1 reorder 0 dupes 0 bytes 0 packets 0 Total: 0 packets ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: IPv6 multicast with VRF 2022-04-21 9:24 ` Vladimir Oltean @ 2022-04-21 23:44 ` David Ahern 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: David Ahern @ 2022-04-21 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vladimir Oltean; +Cc: netdev On 4/21/22 3:24 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: >>> ip -6 route get ff02::1%eth0 >>> Error: inet6 prefix is expected rather than "ff02::1%eth0". >> >> ip -6 ro get oif eth0 ff02::1 >> >> (too many syntax differences between tools) > > Could you explain why specifying the oif is needed here? If I don't do multicast and linklocal are local to a device, so you need to specify which interface to use. > it, I still can't find the route. Either that, or what would an > application need to do to find the route from the VRF FIB? applications bind their sockets to a VRF device or a port device. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-04-21 23:44 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-04-20 16:54 IPv6 multicast with VRF Vladimir Oltean 2022-04-20 18:59 ` David Ahern 2022-04-20 19:18 ` Vladimir Oltean 2022-04-20 20:40 ` David Ahern 2022-04-21 9:24 ` Vladimir Oltean 2022-04-21 23:44 ` David Ahern
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.