Re: relayd: pfe_route: failed to add gateway 22 Invalid argument

Hi Claudio,

Am 29.06.23 um 09:01 schrieb Claudio Jeker:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 08:53:05AM +0200, Jörg Streckfuß wrote:
>>
>> Hi list,
>>
>> here is a small addition. Adding and deleting the route to and from routing
>> table on the command line works as expected:
>>
>> fw1 # route add 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4/128 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4 -label
>> geo_service
>> add host 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4/128: gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4
>>
>> fw# route -n show -inet6 | grep 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4
>> 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4 52:01:8d:e4:fd:63 UHLch
>> 1 23015 - 3 vlan18
>> 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4 UGHS
>> 0 0 - 8 vlan18
>>
>> fw1 # route del 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4/128 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4 -label
>> geo_service
>> del host 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4/128: gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4
>>
>> fw1# route -n show -inet6 | grep 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::4
>>
>> 2001:638:dfce:3000::4 52:01:8d:e4:fd:63 UHLc 0
>> 23015 - 3 vlan18
>>
>>
>> Why can't relayd add the route to the table and what does the following log
>> concretely mean:
>>
>> <snip>
>> pfe_route: failed to add gateway 2001:638:dfce:3000::4: 22 Invalid argument
>> <snap>
>>
>
> Run route -n monitor will give you more insights at what is sent to the
> kernel. At least unless the route message is so mangled that the kernel
> fails to parse it.

This is interesting. I ran route -n monitor and run relayd but it says
nothing. No output at all.

> Also xxxx all IPs does not help to understand what is going on.

I will rebuild my setup to 2001:db adresses so I can post the full ipv6
address. Sorry this is because of a company policy.

> Why do you add /128 route with the same IP as the gateway? That just makes
> no sense.

The idea is to check the availability of a service and announce the ip
address to a bgp peer only if the service is up. I know it looks weird
but for ipv4 it works. My naive assumption was to simply adopt it to IPv6.

Is there a more elegant way to do this?

Regards Joerg