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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 C16EBC32792 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 21:26:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BCA3207FA for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 21:26:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=candelatech.com header.i=@candelatech.com header.b="N6bYWVmY" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732108AbfI3V0C (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 17:26:02 -0400 Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173]:60398 "EHLO mail3.candelatech.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727702AbfI3V0C (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 17:26:02 -0400 Received: from [192.168.100.195] (50-251-239-81-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.251.239.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail3.candelatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1EFA213C283; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:45:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail3.candelatech.com 1EFA213C283 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=candelatech.com; s=default; t=1569869151; bh=QRMir/2Pzm8sf9iXSmS9d7M2CKkPM6L2u/3in98jYqE=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=N6bYWVmYc6zxAIs5EahVeNL3RUqOqLnIKakPMtwCFyQv+fHfa/8UrFG18nRBo1rmL 3R/4w0oUx5RAbYd2vvWiJbrFIs2iP5jHGrFmT44g0V6XJU8W8l4SqIcIUC83CgGMu4 cojNVgjipKOFJ0WbR2K3BVze2bm+YXo455pcMQ6w= Subject: Re: Strange routing with VRF and 5.2.7+ To: David Ahern , netdev References: <91749b17-7800-44c0-d137-5242b8ceb819@candelatech.com> <51aae991-a320-43be-bf73-8b8c0ffcba60@candelatech.com> <7d1de949-5cf0-cb74-6ca3-52315c34a340@candelatech.com> <795cb41e-4990-fdbe-8cbe-9c0ada751b80@gmail.com> From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies Message-ID: <9eb82b65-0067-4320-4b11-7a02b6226cd5@candelatech.com> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:45:50 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <795cb41e-4990-fdbe-8cbe-9c0ada751b80@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 9/22/19 12:23 PM, David Ahern wrote: > On 9/20/19 9:57 AM, Ben Greear wrote: >> On 9/10/19 6:08 PM, Ben Greear wrote: >>> On 9/10/19 3:17 PM, Ben Greear wrote: >>>> Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k, >>>> and using >>>> VRF for the routing. >>> >>> Looks like the same issue happens w/out VRF, but there I have oodles >>> of routing >>> rules, so it is an area ripe for failure. >>> >>> Will upgrade to 5.2.14+ and retest, and try 4.20 as well.... >> >> Turns out, this was ipsec (strongswan) inserting a rule that pointed to >> a table >> that we then used for a vrf w/out realizing the rule was added. >> >> Stopping strongswan and/or reconfiguring how routing tables are assigned >> resolved the issue. >> > > Hi Ben: > > Since you are the pioneer with vrf and ipsec, can you add an ipsec > section with some notes to Documentation/networking/vrf.txt? I need to to some more testing, an initial attempt to reproduce my working config on another system did not work properly, and I have not yet dug into it. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com