Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
mafiosa
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:10 pm
Location: Kolkata, India
Contact:

OSPF routes marked invalid

Fri Jul 03, 2020 8:30 pm

I have established ospf neighborship with other mikrotik routers yet the ospf routes learnt are marked as invalid on the router running rosv7 beta 8
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
oreggin
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:21 pm

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:30 pm

Hi!
I have a ROS v7.1ß1 test setup with CHR on qemus and I have the same issue with OSPFv2. All of my ipv4 ospf routes duplicated and inactive:
[admin@rtr1.CPE] > routing/ospf/interface-state/print 
Flags: D - dynamic; V - virtual-interface 
 0 D  address=fe80::d012:2bff:fe83:2e99%Loopback0 area=backbone6 instance-id=0 state="DR" dr=10.0.10.11 bdr=0.0.0.0 

 1 D  address=10.0.10.11%Loopback0 area=backbone4 instance-id=0 state="DR" dr=10.0.10.11 bdr=0.0.0.0 

 2 D  address=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:5102%ether2 area=backbone6 instance-id=0 state="Point-to-Point" 

 3 D  address=10.0.1.2%ether2 area=backbone4 instance-id=0 state="Point-to-Point" 
[admin@rtr1.CPE] > routing/ospf/neighbor-state/print  
Flags: X - disabled, I - inactive, D - dynamic 
 0 D address=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 router-id=10.0.10.1 state="Full" 

 1 D address=10.0.1.1 router-id=10.0.10.1 state="Full" 
[admin@rtr1.CPE] > ip route/print detail where ospf     
Flags: D - dynamic; X - disabled, I - inactive, A - active; C - connect, S - static, r - rip, b - bgp, o - ospf, d - dhcp, v - vpn, m - modem; + - ecmp 
   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.0/30 routing-table=main gateway=ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.0/30 routing-table=main gateway="" type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.4/30 routing-table=main gateway=ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.4/30 routing-table=main gateway="" type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.8/30 routing-table=main gateway=ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.8/30 routing-table=main gateway="" type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.12/30 routing-table=main gateway=ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=10.0.0.12/30 routing-table=main gateway="" type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

etc...
Intersting is OSPFv3 works fine:
[admin@rtr1.CPE] > ipv6/route/print detail where ospf
Flags: D - dynamic; X - disabled, I - inactive, A - active; C - connect, S - static, r - rip, b - bgp, o - ospf, d - dhcp, v - vpn, m - modem; + - ecmp 
   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:1 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:2 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:3 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:4 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:5 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:6 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DIo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:11 routing-table=main gateway=Loopback0 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:12 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:13 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:14 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:15 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 

   DAo  dst-address=b00b::10:0:10:16 routing-table=main gateway=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 immediate-gw=fe80::a00:27ff:fe00:4101%ether2 type=unicast distance=110 scope=20 
        target-scope=10 
[admin@rtr1.CPE] >
 
User avatar
mrz
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 7038
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:45 pm
Location: Latvia
Contact:

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Wed Jul 22, 2020 3:00 pm

Does it start to work if you change interface type from point-to-point to broadcast?
 
mafiosa
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:10 pm
Location: Kolkata, India
Contact:

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:05 am

Does it start to work if you change interface type from point-to-point to broadcast?
No same issue even with point to point and broadcast!
Also for bgp nexthop is getting changed to :: which is invalid as a result all routes become invalid.
 
mducharme
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:03 am

I am having this issue with only some of my OSPFv2 routes.

I have OSPFv2 routes across an L2TP tunnel to a RouterOS 6 device - these all show as invalid. I also have OSPFv2 routes to a RouterOS 6 device across an EoIP tunnel - these seem to work.
 
User avatar
mrz
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 7038
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:45 pm
Location: Latvia
Contact:

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:15 pm

FYI problem is only on P2P interfaces (not ospf interface type but actual P2P interfaces like l2tp etc. )
We will fix the problem as soon as possible.
 
oreggin
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:21 pm

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:39 am

Does it start to work if you change interface type from point-to-point to broadcast?
Yes, thanks mrz for workaround.
 
mafiosa
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:10 pm
Location: Kolkata, India
Contact:

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Sat Jul 25, 2020 3:20 pm

FYI problem is only on P2P interfaces (not ospf interface type but actual P2P interfaces like l2tp etc. )
We will fix the problem as soon as possible.
Yes problem is with p2p as interface types and p2p tunnel interfaces
 
mafiosa
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:10 pm
Location: Kolkata, India
Contact:

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:00 pm

FYI problem is only on P2P interfaces (not ospf interface type but actual P2P interfaces like l2tp etc. )
We will fix the problem as soon as possible.
Hello I can confirm that with gre tunnel interface if I set network type to broadcast then the ospf routes work. However on enabling ospfv3 the cou usage increates to 50-70% and sometimes lan interfaces stop processing traffic (ipv4)
 
VVlasy
just joined
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:51 am

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Sun Dec 26, 2021 2:31 pm

I am still having this issue on 7.1.1
 
ipred
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 3:15 am

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Sun Dec 26, 2021 5:40 pm

Hello everyone.
I'm facing the fact that ospf routes are marked invalid on ROSv7 (whatever version I'm using). But it is random!.
A simple CHR installation runs ok.
Another simple CHR doesn't work at all. Both are on the same bridge on the server they are running.
Image
I really don't know why it is random, being that on 2 of 5 chr instances it runs ok and the only differences are the Ether IP and Loopback IP.
BTW: If I run CHR v6.49 they all work perfect, HOWEVER, it seems CHR v6.49 can't be run with virtio drivers (it is not only me), so my only chance is to make ospf on rosv7 run.

Thanks in advance.
 
hammy559
just joined
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:34 pm

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Thu Dec 30, 2021 2:08 am

...
BTW: If I run CHR v6.49 they all work perfect, HOWEVER, it seems CHR v6.49 can't be run with virtio drivers (it is not only me)....
Make sure your VM for CHR is set to use the i440fx chipset and not q35. If it is set to q35 the virtio drivers will not work but under i440fx they should work fine. I had a similar issue and that is what fixed it. Please spread to other post where people are having issues
 
mducharme
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Thu Dec 30, 2021 3:10 am

I'm facing the fact that ospf routes are marked invalid on ROSv7 (whatever version I'm using). But it is random!.
F means filtered, which means you have a route filter created to filter those routes out and prevent them from being activated. Get rid of the filter and all of those routes should be loaded.
 
VVlasy
just joined
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:51 am

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:36 pm

Image

All rules are disabled. Maybe an issue with upgrade from v6 to v7?

Edit: SOLVED

compared to v6, an accept rule needs to exists in route filters.
Image
 
mducharme
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:36 pm

compared to v6, an accept rule needs to exists in route filters.
Yes, but if you do not need any filters, simply omit the filter chain name from your ospf configuration rather than specifying ospf-in and ospf-out, and then no rules are necessary. The accept rule is only necessary if you have specified the filter chain name in the OSPF config.
 
VVlasy
just joined
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:51 am

Re: OSPF routes marked invalid

Wed Jan 05, 2022 12:07 pm

As you can see from my config, I need some filters. So I cannot simply omit them.
This is a change in behavior from v6 which breaks existing configurations. Hopefully this helps folks upgrading.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests