VRF's are not added/discovered for Arista switches

Help
1

It seems that vrf discovery does not work for Arista switches, at least I haven’t gotten it to work.

Validation is fine and I have the vrf module globally on.

Output from a discovery to a specific host where we would want to be able to check the bgp sessions inside a vrf: https://p.libren.ms/view/26c0933a

It seems that arista has a separate MIB for vrf’s: http://www.circitor.fr/Mibs/Html/A/ARISTA-VRF-MIB.php so not sure if some customization is required here.

But also not sure if the os is detected properly looking at this:

  • Attempting to initialize OS: arista_eos

  • Attempting to initialize OS: arista

  • OS initialized as Generic

  • Modules status: Global+

2

I’ve looked further but don’t seem to be able to find a proper list of VRFs with the arista mib, I can only see the vrf names in port assignments but not a directly parse-able list.

3

May be it could still be possible to gather whatever is accessible.
You can try to have a look at the existing code and try to hack something out of it. We can then help you make it cleaner after.

4

I’ll indeed see about where can we most reliably collect the data from, then I can further with the case.

5

Seems that the VRF names should be found with oid .1.3.6.1.4.1.30065.3.18.1.1.1.1 but it doesn’t seem to be supported :frowning:

One could get each unique string obtained with 1.3.6.1.4.1.30065.3.18.1.2 but that is a bit ugly.

6

Confirmed from arista that the only way to get the info is to parse it out of the response of ARISTA-VRF-MIB::aristaVrfRoutingStatus, which is .1.3.6.1.4.1.30065.3.18.1.1.1.2 in the arista vrf mib.

It returns for example 3.18.1.1.1.2.3.109.103.116 where the first byte after the 2 is protocol identifier (I think) so 3 in dec is ipv4 and 9 in dec is ipv6. The rest are ascii codes in dec so in this case the vrf name would be ‘mgt’ (109 103 116).

Unfortunately I have no clue how this could be implemented to get the vrfs for arista switches :slight_smile:

7

Hi @Elias,

We can do that, we have functions in the snmp libs to parse this kind of structure. I cannot have a look at that in the near future but this can definitly be done.

Please open an issue here : https://github.com/librenms/librenms/issues

With the required data added to the issue, I’ll have a look at some point :smiley:

8

Awesome, thanks!

9

Related ticket: BGP sessions under VRF

10

Test time here :