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=-2.4 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 B6146C32771 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 19:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC2D2084D for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 19:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=candelatech.com header.i=@candelatech.com header.b="HXhVfXnm" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729037AbgAOTCa (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:02:30 -0500 Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173]:53796 "EHLO mail3.candelatech.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728921AbgAOTCa (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:02:30 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.47] (unknown [50.34.171.50]) (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 6124113C362; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:02:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail3.candelatech.com 6124113C362 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=candelatech.com; s=default; t=1579114949; bh=w6vjGXE6QpPKa73RnEVOmKrxKE28MtE07x9axzOYIaI=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=HXhVfXnm1R2rUWPAT66FMRT7MkmvyUG7JfcIZQQdfefPhGmQrziBxHViBTgYV2kJE zXyioqUFDqQIpytj1cvKjOZwQAAR0AQpXpQ1Bi5JL2X+lxSNIrXXEJkRs27YUpJ9ZF SKLJE/uJHRB20PIrmrfzbG/n8EBWezMjr+1gtS28= Subject: Re: vrf and multicast is broken in some cases To: David Ahern , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" References: <3906c6fe-e7a7-94c1-9d7d-74050084b56e@gmail.com> From: Ben Greear Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:02:26 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3906c6fe-e7a7-94c1-9d7d-74050084b56e@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 01/15/2020 10:45 AM, David Ahern wrote: > On 1/15/20 10:57 AM, Ben Greear wrote: >> Hello, >> >> We put two different ports into their own VRF, and then tried to run a >> multicast >> sender on one and receiver on the other. The receiver does not receive >> anything. >> >> Is this a known problem? >> >> If we do a similar setup with policy based routing rules instead of VRF, >> then the multicast >> test works. >> > > It works for OSPF for example. I have lost track of FRR features that > use it, so you will need to specify more details. > > Are the sender / receiver on the same host? Yes, like eth2 sending to eth3, eth2 is associated with _vrf2, eth3 with _vrf3. I'll go poking at the code. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com