Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bgpd: fix 'nexthop_set failed' error message often displayed #16782

Merged

Conversation

pguibert6WIND
Copy link
Member

The below log message is often seen when peering with BGP peers. This message has been displayed by introducing a recent fix that exposes the IP/port information when available.

Fix this by separating the peer->su_[local/remote] contexts used for display, and for handling the peer session operational.

Two new attributes are appended to the peer structure: su_remote_display and su_local_display. Those fields are only used for display the network information (in vty and in snmp).

Fixes: 78ce639 ("bgpd: fix addressing information of non established outgoing sessions")

Copy link
Member

@ton31337 ton31337 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TBH, I don't like this idea :) Maybe we can do sockunion_free() (overwrite with the new one) only once it's connected?

The 'nexthop_set failed, resetting connection - intf' log message
is often seen when peering with BGP peers. This message has been
displayed by introducing a recent fix that extracts the IP/port
information of outgoing connections when peering is not yet
established.

Fix this by separating the update of the socket information from
the call to bgp_zebra_nexthop_set().

Signed-off-by: Philippe Guibert <[email protected]>
@pguibert6WIND pguibert6WIND force-pushed the fix_nexthop_set_failed_message branch from c15b645 to 37702ca Compare September 12, 2024 14:17
@github-actions github-actions bot added size/M and removed size/L labels Sep 12, 2024
@pguibert6WIND
Copy link
Member Author

TBH, I don't like this idea :) Maybe we can do sockunion_free() (overwrite with the new one) only once it's connected?

I have a second proposal..

Copy link
Member

@ton31337 ton31337 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@ton31337 ton31337 merged commit b5e266b into FRRouting:master Sep 19, 2024
11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants