From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 994BDC07542 for ; Mon, 27 May 2019 08:35:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747D721734 for ; Mon, 27 May 2019 08:35:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726494AbfE0IfI (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2019 04:35:08 -0400 Received: from mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com ([67.231.157.136]:34906 "EHLO mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725869AbfE0IfH (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2019 04:35:07 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0049462.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4R8QGcE016624; Mon, 27 May 2019 04:34:30 -0400 Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2src6c0b7c-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 May 2019 04:34:30 -0400 Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x4R8YSRc046697; Mon, 27 May 2019 03:34:29 -0500 Received: from zlp30499.vci.att.com (zlp30499.vci.att.com [135.46.181.149]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x4R8YObi046559 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 27 May 2019 03:34:24 -0500 Received: from zlp30499.vci.att.com (zlp30499.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30499.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 08648400B57D; Mon, 27 May 2019 08:34:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (unknown [135.41.1.46]) by zlp30499.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id DD0CB400B579; Mon, 27 May 2019 08:34:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x4R8YLpG022608; Mon, 27 May 2019 03:34:23 -0500 Received: from mail.eng.vyatta.net (mail.eng.vyatta.net [10.156.50.82]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x4R8YEgk022206; Mon, 27 May 2019 03:34:14 -0500 Received: from gwilkie-Precision-7520 (unknown [10.156.17.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eng.vyatta.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D5DB3600D5; Mon, 27 May 2019 01:34:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 09:34:02 +0100 From: George Wilkie To: David Ahern Cc: Shrijeet Mukherjee , "David S. Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] vrf: local route leaking Message-ID: <20190527083402.GA7269@gwilkie-Precision-7520> References: <20190524080551.754-1-gwilkie@vyatta.att-mail.com> <0d920356-8d12-b0b5-c14b-3600e54e9390@gmail.com> <20190525070924.GA1184@debian10.local> <47e25c7c-1dd4-25ee-1d7b-f8c4c0783573@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47e25c7c-1dd4-25ee-1d7b-f8c4c0783573@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-05-27_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=742 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905270059 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 09:13:13AM -0600, David Ahern wrote: > > Using a loopback doesn't work, e.g. if 10.1.1.0/24 was on a global interface: > > ip ro add vrf vrf-a 10.1.1.0/24 dev lo > > That works for MPLS when you exit the LSP and deliver locally, so it > should work here as well. I'll take a look early next week. OK, thanks. > I would prefer to avoid it if possible. VRF route leaking for forwarding > does not have the second lookup and that is the primary use case. VRL > with local delivery is a 1-off use case and you could just easily argue > that the connection should not rely on the leaked route. ie., the > control plane is aware of both VRFs, and the userspace process could use > the VRF-B path. > Although it isn't always possible to change the userspace process - may be running in a specific vrf by 'ip vrf exec'