Can not get an active ospf interface when "ospf passive-interface default" is present in frr 8.0 #9240
Comments
idryzhov
added a commit
to idryzhov/frr
that referenced
this issue
Jul 30, 2021
This command is currently always treated as an "unset" command, assuming that active is the default type of the interface. In reality, the default type of the interface can be changed using "passive-interface default" command. Both "no" and regular commands can be "set" commands, depending on the default value. They are treated as an "unset" when there's already a config of the opposite type. All this logic is in ospf_passive_interface_update. Fixes FRRouting#9240. Signed-off-by: Igor Ryzhov <[email protected]>
|
Thanks for filing this issue. Should be fixed in #9239. |
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 3, 2021
This command is currently always treated as an "unset" command, assuming that active is the default type of the interface. In reality, the default type of the interface can be changed using "passive-interface default" command. Both "no" and regular commands can be "set" commands, depending on the default value. They are treated as an "unset" when there's already a config of the opposite type. All this logic is in ospf_passive_interface_update. Fixes #9240. Signed-off-by: Igor Ryzhov <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 82f0277)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
frr Version: 8.0
OS: debian buster (using debian package)
Kernel: linux-image-4.19.0-13-amd64 (4.19.160-2)
Having "passive-interface default" under "router ospf" during upgrade to 8.0 let the exception lines ("no passive-interface XXX") vanish. Which is OK, because these are not supported there any more. But the now needed command "no ip ospf passive" under "int XXX" does not override the "passive.interface default", i.e. is ignored.
In a productive environment which uses "passive-interface default" this means loosing ospf connectivitiy alltogether, thus most probably also loosing any other connectivity depending on that (i.e. bgp).
[x ] Did you check if this is a duplicate issue?
[ ] Did you test it on the latest FRRouting/frr master branch?
To Reproduce
configure "passive-interface default" under "router ospf" and try to activate ospf for any interface X with "no ip ospf passive".
This does not work.
Expected behavior
"no ip ospf passive" works
(and gets correctly moved over from "no passive-interface XXX" under "router ospf" if such is there before an upgrade (that should explicitly be tested in order to avoid missing connectivity when upgrading)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: