OSPF deleting local routes (New to the protocol)



  • Good afternoon folks,

    I've been looking into implementing OSPF into a PFSense routing structure that (simplified) looks like in the image below.
    Let's forget about firewalling on the machines for now, they're all in Filtering/NAT disabled in my test.
    As you can imagine, manually maintaining routing tables can be quite difficult undesirable.
    All boxes are running 2.0RC3 amd64 releases from July 4th.

    I saw that there is an OSPF package available, and installed it on two test machines.
    After configuration, I ran tcpdump and saw that the two hosts exchanged OSPF information as desired.
    However, the hosts would lose the local routes to their own subnet.

    I.e. if GW2 and GW3 exchanged OSPF information, then GW3 would lose it's local 192.168.4.0/24 route via interface, and only retain 192.168.4.2 via loopback.
    GW2 also would lose it's 192.168.4.0/24 interface route.

    Both hosts would remain unreachable until manually readding the route form the console, but the OSPF would synchronize them back away.

    So my questions are:
    1. Is there any trick to the OSPF configuration to prevent this?
    2. Is the OpenOSPFd package considered usable?
    3. Has anyone successfully implemented OSPF on 2.0RC3?

    If anyone has any information regarding these questions or other hints, it would be greatly appreciated!
    Thank you for your help!

    Edit: I did some more testing, between two routers.

    Both routers have LAN & WAN advertised as metric 5.

    Setup is:

    H1 - 10.0.2.3/24 <–> 10.0.2.1/24 - GW1 - 10.0.0.1/24 <---> 10.0.0.2/24 - GW2 - 10.0.1.1/24 <---> 10.0.1.2/24 - H2

    If GW1 advertises 10.0.2.0/24 as stub network and GW2 advertises 10.0.1.0/24 as stub network, all routes are exchanged perfectly, and H1 can ping H2 and vice versa.

    If, however, for example, GW1 advertises 10.0.2.0/24 as non-stub network, GW2 loses it's 10.0.0.0/24 route and all is lost.

    I think I'm misconfiguring something here.

    Any suggestions?




  • The same issue was reported in http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,32223.html – but I don't know if Jesse found a solution.



  • @namezero111111:

    So my questions are:
    1. Is there any trick to the OSPF configuration to prevent this?
    2. Is the OpenOSPFd package considered usable?
    3. Has anyone successfully implemented OSPF on 2.0RC3?

    I didn't find any way to prevent OpenOSPFd from replacing other routes that I would consider preferred (eg. directly connected networks).  The developer/porter didn't reply to my email on the topic.  So I found OpenOSPFd on pfsense to be pretty unusable.  I think it'd work in certain simple environments, but I couldn't get things to work in ours and went to static routes + bgp.



  • It can be done.
    You just have to learn how to do it ;)

    So sorry to say but RTFM



  • @ermal:

    It can be done.
    You just have to learn how to do it ;)

    So sorry to say but RTFM

    I think I may be having the same problem, but to know for sure that I didn't do what the manual specified, would you mind specifying what manual you read that made it so clear?

    If not, can anyone else provide better information than, "sorry to say but RTFM"?


Locked