Subject: Re: VRF_DEVICE integration plan

From: David Ahern <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 11:43:46 -0600

On 4/28/16 11:16 AM, Elluru, Krishna Mohan wrote:
>
> I posted a few bug fix patches a week or two ago. Not sure what the
> status is with respect to 4.3 - 4.5 trees.
>
> MOHAN> Sure. Are those patches sent over netdev mailer list?

yes. All patches for VRF - kernel and iproute2 - are sent to netdev.

> MOHAN> sorry for not being clear. My ask was, to create a namespace we need cap_admin privileges currently, but your earlier mails suggested that we should be able to configure/create vrf device with net_admin capabilities. Is this support present /expected to be added soon?

VRF is implemented using a netdevice. As such the ability to create one 
requires the same permissions as creating any other netdevice 
(CAP_NET_ADMIN).

>> 5. Is there a possibility of enabling secondary level lookup, to give a leak functionality to parent route table from device local route table? I tested with veth pair, configured one as default gateway, it is possible to forward traffic b/w the interfaces, looking for cleaner method.
>
> Are you referring to inter-vrf routing? See slide 27
> http://www.netdevconf.org/1.1/proceedings/slides/ahern-vrf-tutorial.pdf
> Full lookup in VRF table
> ▪ ip route add table vrf-red 1.1.1.0/24 dev vrf-green
> MOHAN> In slide 27 above shows inter vrf routing, requirement is to use current namespace global route table if the ip lookup fails in vrf-device routing table.
> Reference: https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junose16.1/topics/task/configuration/mbgp-secondary-routing-table-search.html

One solution is to create a VRF device that is associated with the main 
table and then use an inter-vrf route to jump to the main table.

VRF tables do need a default route (e.g., unreachable with high metric 
value) else the FIB lookups will proceed to the next table which is most 
likely not what you want.

David