mirror of
				https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird.git
				synced 2024-05-11 16:54:54 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	
		
			
				
	
	
		
			161 lines
		
	
	
		
			8.0 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			161 lines
		
	
	
		
			8.0 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
| <chapt>BIRD Design
 | |
| 
 | |
| <sect>Introduction
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>This document describes the internal workings of BIRD, its architecture,
 | |
| design decisions and rationale behind them. It also contains documentation on
 | |
| all the essential components of the system and their interfaces.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Routing daemons are complicated things which need to act in real time
 | |
| to complex sequences of external events, respond correctly even to the most erroneous behavior
 | |
| of their environment and still handle enormous amount of data with reasonable
 | |
| speed. Due to all of this, their design is very tricky as one needs to carefully
 | |
| balance between efficiency, stability and (last, but not least) simplicity of
 | |
| the program and it would be possible to write literally hundreds of pages about
 | |
| all of these issues. In accordance to the famous quote of Anton Chekhov "Shortness
 | |
| is a sister of talent", we've tried to write a much shorter document highlighting
 | |
| the most important stuff and leaving the boring technical details better explained
 | |
| by the program source itself together with comments contained therein.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <sect>Design goals
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>When planning the architecture of BIRD, we've taken a close look at the other existing routing
 | |
| daemons and also at some of the operating systems used on dedicated routers, gathered all important
 | |
| features and added lots of new ones to overcome their shortcomings and to better match the requirements
 | |
| of routing in today's Internet: IPv6, policy routing, route filtering and so on. From this
 | |
| planning, the following set of design goals has arisen:
 | |
| 
 | |
| <itemize>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Support all the standard routing protocols and make it easy to add new ones.</it>
 | |
| This leads to modularity and clean separation between the core and the protocols.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Support both IPv4 and IPv6 in the same source tree, re-using most of the code.</it>
 | |
| This leads to abstraction of IP addresses and operations on them.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Minimize OS dependent code to make porting as easy as possible.</it>
 | |
| Unfortunately, such code cannot be avoided at all as the details of communication with
 | |
| the IP stack differ from OS to OS and they often vary even between different
 | |
| versions of the same OS. But we can isolate such code in special modules and
 | |
| do the porting by changing or replacing just these modules.
 | |
| Also, don't rely on specific features of various operating systems, but be able
 | |
| to make use of them if they are available.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Allow multiple routing tables.</it>
 | |
| Easily solvable by abstracting out routing tables and the corresponding operations.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Offer powerful route filtering.</it>
 | |
| There already were several attempts to incorporate route filters to a dynamic router,
 | |
| but most of them have used simple sequences of filtering rules which were very inflexible
 | |
| and hard to use for non-trivial filters. We've decided to employ a simple loop-free
 | |
| programming language having access to all the route attributes and being able to
 | |
| modify the most of them.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Support easy configuration and re-configuration.</it>
 | |
| Most routers use a simple configuration language designed ad hoc with no structure at all
 | |
| and allow online changes of configuration by using their command-line interface, thus
 | |
| any complex re-configurations are hard to achieve without replacing the configuration
 | |
| file and restarting the whole router. We've decided to use a more general approach: to
 | |
| have a configuration defined in a context-free language with blocks and nesting, to
 | |
| perform all configuration changes by editing the configuration file, but to be able
 | |
| to read the new configuration and smoothly adapt to it without disturbing parts of
 | |
| the routing process which are not affected by the change.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Be able to be controlled online.</it>
 | |
| In addition to the online reconfiguration, a routing daemon should be able to communicate
 | |
| with the user and with many other programs (primarily scripts used for network maintenance)
 | |
| in order to make it possible to inspect contents of routing tables, status of all
 | |
| routing protocols and also to control their behavior (disable, enable or reset a protocol without restarting all the others). To achieve
 | |
| this, we implement a simple command-line protocol based on those used by FTP and SMTP
 | |
| (that is textual commands and textual replies accompanied by a numeric code which makes
 | |
| them both readable to a human and easy to recognize in software).
 | |
| 
 | |
| <item><it>Respond to all events in real time.</it>
 | |
| A typical solution to this problem is to use lots of threads to separate the workings
 | |
| of all the routing protocols and also of the user interface parts and to hope that
 | |
| the scheduler will assign time to them in a fair enough manner. This is surely a good
 | |
| solution, but we have resisted the temptation and preferred to avoid the overhead of threading
 | |
| and the large number of locks involved and preferred a event driven architecture with
 | |
| our own scheduling of events. An unpleasant consequence of such an approach
 | |
| is that long lasting tasks must be split to more parts linked by special
 | |
| events or timers to make the CPU available for other tasks as well.
 | |
| 
 | |
| </itemize>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <sect>Architecture
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The requirements set above have lead to a simple modular architecture containing
 | |
| the following types of modules:
 | |
| 
 | |
| <descrip>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>Core modules</tagp> implement the core functions of BIRD: taking care
 | |
| of routing tables, keeping protocol status, interacting with the user using
 | |
| the Command-Line Interface (to be called CLI in the rest of this document)
 | |
| etc.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>Library modules</tagp> form a large set of various library functions
 | |
| implementing several data abstractions, utility functions and also functions
 | |
| which are a part of the standard libraries on some systems, but missing on other
 | |
| ones.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>Resource management modules</tagp> take care of resources, their allocation
 | |
| and automatic freeing when the module having requested shuts itself down.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>Configuration modules</tagp> are fragments of lexical analyzer,
 | |
| grammar rules and the corresponding snippets of C code. For each group
 | |
| of code modules (core, each protocol, filters) there exist a configuration
 | |
| module taking care of all the related configuration stuff.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>The filter</tagp> implements the route filtering language.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>Protocol modules</tagp> implement the individual routing protocols.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>System-dependent modules</tagp> implement the interface between BIRD
 | |
| and specific operating systems.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <tagp>The client</tagp> is a simple program providing an easy, though friendly
 | |
| interface to the CLI.
 | |
| 
 | |
| </descrip>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <sect>Implementation
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>BIRD has been written in GNU C. We've considered using C++, but we've
 | |
| preferred the simplicity and straightforward nature of C which gives us fine
 | |
| control over all implementation details and on the other hand enough
 | |
| instruments to build the abstractions we need.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The modules are statically linked to produce a single executable file
 | |
| (except for the client which stands on its own).
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The building process is controlled by a set of Makefiles for GNU Make,
 | |
| intermixed with several Perl and shell scripts.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The initial configuration of the daemon, detection of system features
 | |
| and selection of the right modules to include for the particular OS
 | |
| and the set of protocols the user has chosen is performed by a configure
 | |
| script generated by GNU Autoconf.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The parser of the configuration is generated by the GNU Bison.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The documentation is generated using <file/SGMLtools/ with our own DTD
 | |
| and mapping rules which produce both an online version in HTML and
 | |
| a neatly formatted one for printing (first converted
 | |
| from SGML to &latex; and then processed by &tex; and <file/dvips/ to
 | |
| get a PostScript file).
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The comments from C sources which form a part of the programmer's
 | |
| documentation are extracted using a modified version of the <file/kernel-doc/
 | |
| tool.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>If you want to work on BIRD, it's highly recommended to configure it
 | |
| with a <tt/--enable-debug/ switch which enables some internal consistency
 | |
| checks and it also links BIRD with a memory allocation checking library
 | |
| if you have one (either <tt/efence/ or <tt/dmalloc/).
 | |
| 
 | |
| <!--
 | |
| LocalWords:  IPv IP CLI snippets Perl Autoconf SGMLtools DTD SGML dvips
 | |
| LocalWords:  PostScript
 | |
|  -->
 |