| .. _routes: |
| |
| Routes |
| ^^^^^^ |
| |
| Basics |
| ------ |
| |
| The anatomy of a route is crucial to understand: |
| |
| .. code-block:: console |
| |
| 1.1.1.0/24 via 10.0.0.1 eth0 |
| |
| A route is composed of two parts; **what** to match against and **how** to forward |
| the matched packets. In the above example we want to match packets |
| whose destination IP address is in the 1.1.1.0/24 subnet and then we |
| want to forward those packet to 10.0.0.1 on interface eth0. We |
| therefore want to match the **prefix** 1.1.1.0/24 and forward on the |
| **path** to 10.0.0.1, eth0. |
| |
| Matching on a prefix is the particular task of the IP FIB, matching on |
| other packet attributes is done by other subsystems, e.g. matching on |
| MPLS labels in the MPLS-FIB, or matching on a tuple in ACL based |
| forwarding (ABF), 'matching' on all packets that arrive on an L3 |
| interface (l3XC). Although these subsystems match on different |
| properties, they share the infrastructure on **how** to forward |
| matched packets, that is they share the **paths**. The FIB paths (or |
| really the path-list) thus provide services to clients, this service |
| is to **contribute** forwarding, this, in terms that will be made |
| clear in later sections, is to provide the DPO to use. |
| |
| The prime function of the FIB is to *resolve* the paths for a |
| route. To resolve a route is to construct an object graph that fully |
| describes how to forward matching packets. This means that the graph |
| must terminate with an object (the leaf node) that describes how |
| to send a packet on an interface [#f1]_, i.e what encap to add to the |
| packet and what interface to send it to; this is the purpose of the IP |
| adjacency object. In Figure 3 the route is resolved as the graph is |
| complete from *fib_entry_t* to *ip_adjacency_t*. |
| |
| |
| Thread Model |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The FIB is not thread safe. All actions on the FIB are expected to |
| occur exclusively in the main thread. However, the data-structures |
| that FIB updates to add routes are thread safe, |
| w.r.t. addition/deletion and read, therefore routes can be added |
| without holding the worker thread barrier lock. |
| |
| |
| Tables |
| ------ |
| |
| An IP FIB is a set of prefixes against which to match; it is |
| sub-address family (SAFI) specific (i.e. there is one for ipv4 and ipv6, unicast |
| and multicast). An IP Table is address family (AFI) specific (i.e. the |
| 'table' includes the unicast and multicast FIB). |
| |
| Each FIB is identified by the SAFI and instance number (the [pool] |
| index), each table is identified by the AFI and ID. The table's ID is |
| assigned by the user when the table is constructed. Table ID 0 is |
| reserved for the global/default table. |
| |
| In most routing models a VRF is composed of an IPv4 and IPv6 table, |
| however, VPP has no construct to model this association, it deals only |
| with tables and FIBs. |
| |
| A unicast FIB is comprised of two route data-bases; forwarding and non-forwarding. The |
| forwarding data-base contains routes against which a packet will perform a longest |
| prefix match (LPM) in the data-plane. The non-forwarding DB contains all the routes |
| with which VPP has been programmed. Some of these routes may be |
| unresolved, preventing their insertion into the forwarding DB. |
| (see section: Adjacency source FIB entries). |
| |
| Model |
| ----- |
| |
| The route data is decomposed into three parts; entry, path-list and paths; |
| |
| * The *fib_entry_t*, which contains the route's prefix, is the representation of that prefix's entry in the FIB table. |
| * The *fib_path_t* is a description of where to send the packets destined to the route's prefix. There are several types of path, including: |
| |
| * Attached next-hop: the path is described with an interface and a next-hop. The next-hop is in the same sub-net as the router's own address on that interface, hence the peer is considered to be *attached* |
| |
| * Attached: the path is described only by an interface. An |
| attached path means that all addresses covered by the route's |
| prefix are on the same L2 segment to which that router's |
| interface is attached. This means it is possible to ARP for any |
| address covered by the route's prefix. If this is not the case |
| then another device in that L2 segment needs to run proxy |
| ARP. An attached path is really only appropriate for a point-to-point |
| (P2P) interface where ARP is not required, i.e. a GRE tunnel. On |
| a p2p interface, attached and attached-nexthop paths will |
| resolve via a special 'auto-adjacency'. This is an adjacency |
| whose next-hop is the all zeros address and describes the only |
| peer on the link. |
| |
| * Recursive: The path is described only via the next-hop and table-id. |
| |
| * De-aggregate: The path is described only via the special all |
| zeros address and a table-id. This implies a subsequent lookup |
| in the table should be performed. |
| |
| * There are other path types, please consult the code. |
| |
| * The *fib_path_list_t* represents the list of paths from which to choose when forwarding. A path-list is a shared object, i.e. it is the parent to multiple fib_entry_t children. In order to share any object type it is necessary for a child to search for an existing object matching its requirements. For this there must be a database. The key to the path-list database is a combined description of all of the paths it contains [#f2]_. Searching the path-list database is required with each route addition, so it is populated only with path-lists for which sharing will bring convergence benefits (see Section: :ref:`fastconvergence`). |
| |
| .. figure:: /_images/fib20fig2.png |
| |
| Figure 2: Route data model class diagram |
| |
| Figure 2 shows an example of a route with two attached-next-hop paths. Each of these |
| paths will *resolve* by finding the adjacency that matches the paths attributes, which |
| are the same as the key for the adjacency database [#f3]_. The *forwarding information (FI)* |
| is the set of adjacencies that are available for load-balancing the traffic in the |
| data-plane. A path *contributes* an adjacency to the route's forwarding information, the |
| path-list contributes the full forwarding information for IP packets. |
| |
| .. figure:: /_images/fib20fig3.png |
| |
| Figure 3: Route object diagram |
| |
| Figure 3 shows the object instances and their relationships created in order to resolve |
| the routes also shown. The graph nature of these relationships is evident; children |
| are displayed at the top of the diagram, their parents below them. Forward walks are |
| thus from top to bottom, back walks bottom to top. The diagram shows the objects |
| that are shared, the path-list and adjacency. Sharing objects is critical to fast |
| convergence (see section :ref:`fastconvergence`). |
| |
| FIB sources |
| """"""""""" |
| There are various entities in the system that can add routes to the FIB tables. |
| Each of these entities is termed a *source*. When the same prefix is added by different |
| sources the FIB must arbitrate between them to determine which source will contribute |
| the forwarding information. Since each source determines the forwarding information |
| using different best path and loop prevention algorithms, it is not correct for the |
| forwarding information of multiple sources to be combined. Instead the FIB must choose |
| to use the forwarding information from only one source. This choice is based on a static |
| priority assignment [#f4]_. The FIB must maintain the information each source has added |
| so it can be restored should that source become the best source. VPP has two |
| *control-plane* sources; the API and the CLI the API has the higher priority. |
| Each *source* data is represented by a *fib_entry_src_t* object of which a |
| *fib_entry_t* maintains a sorted vector. |
| |
| The following configuration: |
| |
| .. code-block:: console |
| |
| $ set interface ip address GigabitEthernet0/8/0 192.168.1.1/24 |
| |
| results in the addition of two FIB entries; 192.168.1.0/24 which is connected and |
| attached, and 192.168.1.1/32 which is connected and local (a.k.a. |
| receive or for-us). A prefix is *connected* when it is applied to a router's interface. |
| Both prefixes are *interface* sourced. The interface source has a high priority, so |
| the accidental or nefarious addition of identical prefixes does not prevent the |
| router from correctly forwarding. Packets matching a connected prefix will |
| generate an ARP request for the packets destination address, this process is known |
| as a *glean*. |
| |
| An *attached* prefix also results in a glean, but the router does not have its own |
| address in that sub-net. The following configuration will result in an attached |
| route, which resolves via an attached path; |
| |
| .. code-block:: console |
| |
| $ ip route add table X 10.10.10.0/24 via gre0 |
| |
| as mentioned before, these are only appropriate for point-to-point |
| links. |
| |
| If table X is not the table to which gre0 is bound, |
| then this is the case of an attached export (see the section :ref:`attachedexport`). |
| |
| Adjacency source FIB entries |
| """""""""""""""""""""""""""" |
| |
| Whenever an ARP entry is created it will source a *fib_entry_t*. In this case the |
| route is of the form: |
| |
| .. code-block:: console |
| |
| $ ip route add table X 10.0.0.1/32 via 10.0.0.1 GigabitEthernet0/8/0 |
| |
| This is a host prefix with a path whose next-hop address is the same host. This route |
| highlights the distinction between the route's prefix - a description of the traffic |
| to match - and the path - a description of where to send the matched traffic. |
| Table X is the same table to which the interface is bound. FIB entries that are |
| sourced by adjacencies are termed *adj-fibs*. The priority of the adjacency source |
| is lower than the API source, so the following configuration: |
| |
| .. code-block:: console |
| |
| $ set interface address 192.168.1.1/24 GigabitEthernet0/8/0 |
| $ ip arp 192.168.1.2 GigabitEthernet0/8/0 dead.dead.dead |
| $ ip route add 192.168.1.2 via 10.10.10.10 GigabitEthernet1/8/0 |
| |
| will forward traffic for 192.168.1.2 via GigabitEthernet1/8/0. That is the route added by the control |
| plane is favoured over the adjacency discovered by ARP. The control plane, with its |
| associated authentication, is considered the authoritative source. To counter the |
| nefarious addition of adj-fibs, through the nefarious injection of adjacencies, the |
| FIB is also required to ensure that only adj-fibs whose less specific covering prefix |
| is attached are installed in forwarding. This requires the use of *cover tracking*, |
| where a route maintains a dependency relationship with the route that is its less |
| specific cover. When this cover changes (i.e. there is a new covering route) or the |
| forwarding information of the cover is updated, then the covered route is notified. |
| Adj-fibs that fail this cover check are not installed in the fib_table_t's forwarding |
| table, they are only present in the non-forwarding table. |
| |
| Overlapping sub-nets are not supported, so no adj-fib has multiple paths. The control |
| plane is expected to remove a prefix configured for an interface before the interface |
| changes VRF. |
| |
| Recursive Routes |
| """""""""""""""" |
| |
| Figure 4 shows the data structures used to describe a recursive route. The |
| representation is almost identical to attached next-hop paths. The difference |
| being that the *fib_path_t* has a parent that is another *fib_entry_t*, termed the |
| *via-entry* |
| |
| .. figure:: /_images/fib20fig4.png |
| |
| Figure 4: Recursive route class diagram. |
| |
| In order to forward traffic to 64.10.128.0/20 the FIB must first determine how to forward |
| traffic to 1.1.1.1/32. This is recursive resolution. Recursive resolution, which is |
| essentially a cache of the data-plane result, emulates a longest prefix match for the |
| *via-address" 1.1.1.1 in the *via-table* table 0 [#f5]_. |
| |
| Recursive resolution (RR) will source a host-prefix entry in the via-table for the |
| via-address. The RR source is a low priority source. In the unlikely [#f6]_ event that the |
| RR source is the best source, then it must derive forwarding information from its |
| covering prefix. |
| |
| There are two cases to consider: |
| |
| * The cover is connected [#f7]_. The via-address is then an attached host and the RR source can resolve directly via the adjacency with the key {via-address, interface-of-connected-cover} |
| * The cover is not connected [#f8]_. The RR source can directly inherit the forwarding information from its cover. |
| |
| This dependency on the covering prefix means the RR source will track its cover The |
| covering prefix will *change* when; |
| |
| * A more specific prefix is inserted. For this reason whenever an entry is inserted into a FIB table its cover must be found so that its covered dependents can be informed. |
| * The existing cover is removed. The covered prefixes must form a new relationship with the next less specific. |
| |
| The cover will be *updated* when the route for the covering prefix is modified. The |
| cover tracking mechanism will provide the RR sourced entry with a notification in the |
| event of a change or update of the cover, and the source can take the necessary action. |
| |
| The RR sourced FIB entry becomes the parent of the *fib_path_t* and will contribute its |
| forwarding information to that path, so that the child's FIB entry can construct its own |
| forwarding information. |
| |
| Figure 5 shows the object instances created to represent the recursive route and |
| its resolving route also shown. |
| |
| .. figure:: /_images/fib20fig5.png |
| |
| Figure 5: Recursive Routes object diagram |
| |
| If the source adding recursive routes does not itself perform recursive resolution [#f9]_ |
| then it is possible that the source may inadvertently programme a recursion loop. |
| |
| An example of a recursion loop is the following configuration: |
| |
| .. code-block:: console |
| |
| $ ip route add 5.5.5.5/32 via 6.6.6.6 |
| $ ip route add 6.6.6.6/32 via 7.7.7.7 |
| $ ip route add 7.7.7.7/32 via 5.5.5.5 |
| |
| This shows a loop over three levels, but any number is possible. FIB will detect |
| recursion loops by forward walking the graph when a *fib_entry_t* forms a child-parent |
| relationship with a *fib_path_list_t*. The walk checks to see if the same object instances |
| are encountered. When a recursion loop is formed the control plane [#f10]_ graph becomes |
| cyclic, thus allowing the child-parent dependencies to form. This is necessary so that |
| when the loop breaks, the affected children and be updated. |
| |
| Output labels |
| """"""""""""" |
| |
| A route may have associated output MPLS labels [#f11]_. These are labels that are expected |
| to be imposed on a packet as it is forwarded. It is important to note that an MPLS |
| label is per-route and per-path, therefore, even though routes share paths they do not |
| necessarily have the same label for that path [#f12]_. A label is therefore uniquely associated |
| to a *fib_entry_t* and associated with one of the *fib_path_t* to which it forwards. |
| MPLS labels are modelled via the generic concept of a *path-extension*. A *fib_entry_t* |
| therefore has a vector of zero to many *fib_path_ext_t* objects to represent the labels |
| with which it is configured. |
| |
| |
| Delegates |
| ^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| A common software development pattern, a delegate is a means to |
| extend the functionality of one object through composition of |
| another, these other objects are called delegates. Both |
| **fib_entry_t** and **ip_adjacency_t** support extension via delegates. |
| |
| The FIB uses delegates to add functionality when those functions are |
| required by only a few objects instances rather than all of them, to |
| save on memory. For example, building/contributing a load-balance |
| object used to forward non-EOS MPLS traffic is only required for a |
| fib_entry_t that corresponds to a BGP peer and that peer is |
| advertising labeled route - there are only a few of |
| these. See **fib_entry_delegate.h** for a full list of delegate types. |
| |
| |
| Tracking |
| ^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| A prime service FIB provides for other sub-system is the ability to |
| 'track' the forwarding for a given next-hop. For example, a tunnel |
| will want to know how to forward to its destination address. It can |
| therefore request of the FIB to track this host-prefix and inform it |
| when the forwarding for that prefix changes. |
| |
| FIB tracking sources a host-prefix entry in the FIB using the 'recusive |
| resolution (RR)' source, it exactly the same way that a recursive path |
| does. If the entry did not previsouly exist, then the RR source will |
| inherit (and track) forwarding from its covering prefix, therefore all |
| packets that match this entry are forwarded in the same way as if the |
| entry did not exist. The tunnel that is tracking this FIB entry will |
| become a child dependent. The benefit to creating the entry, is that |
| it now exists in the FIB node graph, so all actions that happen on its |
| parents, are propagated to the host-prefix entry and consequently to |
| the tunnel. |
| |
| FIB provides a wrapper to the sourcing of the host-prefix using a |
| delegate attached to the entry, and the entry is RR sourced only once. |
| . The benefit of this aproach is that each time a new client tracks |
| the entry it doesn't RR source it. When an entry is sourced all its |
| children are updated. Thus, new clients tracking an entry is |
| O(n^2). With the tracker as indirection, the entry is sourced only once. |
| |
| |
| .. rubric:: Footnotes: |
| |
| .. [#f1] Or terminate in an object that transitions the packet out of |
| the FIB domain, e.g. a drop. |
| .. [#f2] Optimisations |
| .. [#f3] Note it is valid for either interface to be bound to a different table than table 1 |
| .. [#f4] The engaged reader can see the full priority list in vnet/vnet/fib/fib_entry.h |
| .. [#f5] Note it is only possible to add routes via an address (i.e. a/32 or /128) not via a shorter mask prefix. There is no use case for the latter |
| .. [#f6] For iBGP the via-address is the loopback address of the peer PE, for eBGP it is the adj-fib for the CE |
| .. [#f7] As is the case ofr eBGP |
| .. [#f8] As is the case for iBGP |
| .. [#f9] If that source is relying on FIB to perform recursive resolution, then there is no reason it should do so itself. |
| .. [#f10] The derived data-plane graph MUST never be cyclic |
| .. [#f11] Advertised, e.g. by LDP, SR or BGP |
| .. [#f12] The only case where the labels will be the same is BGP VPNv4 label allocation per-VRF |