From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: v6/sit tunnels and VRFs Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 09:48:21 -0600 Message-ID: References: <9cade21c-5d92-d435-386f-6d854e6b6d55@gmail.com> <609f2e30-3e9d-f317-e2b4-ba3fb7d20532@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Barnhill <0xeffeff@gmail.com> Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:51707 "EHLO mail-pf0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750916AbdJ2Ps3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Oct 2017 11:48:29 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f179.google.com with SMTP id n14so8808919pfh.8 for ; Sun, 29 Oct 2017 08:48:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/27/17 8:43 PM, Jeff Barnhill wrote: > ping v4 loopback... > > jeff@VM2:~$ ip route list vrf myvrf > 127.0.0.0/8 dev myvrf proto kernel scope link src 127.0.0.1 > 192.168.200.0/24 via 192.168.210.3 dev enp0s8 > 192.168.210.0/24 dev enp0s8 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.210.2 > > Lookups shown in perf script were for table 255. Is it necessary to > put the l3mdev table first? If I re-order the tables, it starts > working: Yes, we advise moving the local table down to avoid false hits (e.g., duplicate addresses like this between the default VRF and another VRF). I covered that and a few other things at OSS 2017. Latest VRF slides for users: http://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/fe/vrf-tutorial-oss.pdf