| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
This is to refactor ISIS segment routing to match up with OSPF segment routing.
|
|
In this commit we add OSPF segment routing, smoke tests, handlers,
FRR template changes, and CLI commands.
|
|
If a parameter is required is determined from the Python string on commit.
This "indicator" is not used consistently and sometimes missing, or added where
it is not required anymore due to Python script improvement/rewrite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since introducing the XML <defaultValue> node it was common, but redundant,
practice to also add a help string indicating which value would be used as
default if the node is unset.
This makes no sense b/c it's duplicated code/value/characters and prone to
error. The node.def scripts should be extended to automatically render the
appropriate default value into the CLI help string.
For e.g. SSH the current PoC renders:
$ cat templates-cfg/service/ssh/port/node.def
multi:
type: txt
help: Port for SSH service (default: 22)
val_help: u32:1-65535; Numeric IP port
...
Not all subsystems are already migrated to get_config_dict() and make use of
the defaults() call - those subsystems need to be migrated, first before the new
default is added to the CLI help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FRR 7.5
router ospf
passive-interface default
no passive-interface eth0.202
Changed int FRR 8 to
interface eth0.202
no ip ospf passive
!
router ospf
ospf router-id 172.18.254.202
log-adjacency-changes detail
passive-interface default
|
|
This extends commit 6f87d8c910 ("ospf: T3757: support to configure area at an
interface level") with a completion helper to show which Area ID is already in
use when configuring the area for an interface.
|
|
|
|
Commit a8b2e52148d ("xml: Update routing-passive-interface-xml.i file extension
to standard .xml.i") only altered the RIP include statement but did not alter
the OSPF include.
|
|
Add new CLI command:
* "set protocols ospf redistribute table <n>"
|
|
|
|
FRR supports configuring either network prefixes per area, or assign an
interface to an area to participate in the routing process. This is already well
known from other venders and supported by FRR.
A valid VyOS OSPF configuration would then look like:
vyos@vyos# show protocols
ospf {
interface dum0 {
area 0
}
interface eth0.201 {
area 0
authentication {
md5 {
key-id 10 {
md5-key vyos
}
}
}
dead-interval 40
hello-interval 10
priority 1
retransmit-interval 5
transmit-delay 1
}
log-adjacency-changes {
detail
}
parameters {
abr-type cisco
router-id 172.18.254.201
}
passive-interface default
passive-interface-exclude eth0.201
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Capitalization fixes, more consice wording etc.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
When including XML files they all contained a comment from where the snipped
had actually been included from. The comment had been "included start" and
"included end" instead of "include start" and "include end".
This commit corrects the glitch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to fully re-use the XML based OSPF CLI definition for per-VRF routing,
the file structure needs to be reorganized and the common OSPF definition is
moved to its dedicated ospf-common-config.xml.i file, which can then be fully
re-included at the VRF level.
As the amount of include files now has reached a certain amount, this also
introduces "per topic" subdirectories on the filesystem to keep a clean
structure.
|
