search

FRRouting / frr

The FRRouting Protocol Suite
https://frrouting.org/
Other
3.27k stars 1.24k forks source link

OSPF passive I/Fs are not announced if network command is not used #2065

Open pguibert6WIND opened 6 years ago

pguibert6WIND commented 6 years ago

Current FRR behaviour: Adding passive-interface <INTERFACE> under ospf router mode is not enough, if one wants to make participate the networks from those interfaces in the IGP. It is necessary to add network command under ospf router node, so that the IGP gets the netwok information of those interfaces.

CISCO only relies on passive-interface command. This prevents OSPF from being active on this interface, however the associated networks are injected in the IGP.

This ticket is entered to change the FRR behaviour.

vjardin commented 6 years ago

I do not like changing behavior because of Cisco. What's about having a Cisco mode so?

pguibert6WIND commented 6 years ago

There is already an option in OSPF to change the behaviour (ospf abr-type cisco => consider routes through non-backbone areas when its links to the backbone are down ). But I think this is an other option to add somewhere.

ospf passive-behaviour standard | cisco
vjardin commented 6 years ago

I agree for such new "ospf passive-behaviour standard | cisco" command so default mode remains standard one.

donaldsharp commented 6 years ago

Let's ignore the cisco keyword question as that cisco name is not a keyword that I would recommend

We believe that a passive-interface XXX command should automatically include the interface addresses for distribution to peers and at the same time we should not form any neighbors on that peer.

donaldsharp commented 6 years ago

we would prefer to not have a knob to change behavior. Changing this over would be ok.

pguibert6WIND commented 6 years ago

https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/2359

riw777 commented 1 year ago

should this be moved to a feature request?