Network functionality is improved because network paths can be segmented without requiring multiple routers. Because the routing instances are independent, the same or overlapping IP addresses can be used without conflicting with each other.

VRFs are the TCP/IP layer 3 equivalent of a VLAN. One or more logical or physical interfaces may have a VRF and these VRFs do not share routes therefore the packets are only forwarded between interfaces on the same VRF. In IP-based computer networks, virtual routing and forwarding (VRF) is a technology that allows multiple instances of a routing table to co-exist within the same router at the same time. VRF stands for “Virtual Routing and Forwarding”. See the bottom of this post for a link to the repository that contains the complete test environment. In the rest of this post, I’ll be referring to these hostnames. I created the following network topology for this test: I generally use Mininet for this, which provides a simple Python API for creating virtual nodes and switches and creating links between them. When investigating this sort of networking question, I find it easiest to reproduce the topology in a virtual environment so that it’s easy to test things out. …can we set things up so that hosts on the “inner” network can communicate with hosts on the “outer” network using the range 192.168.3.0/24, and similarly for communication in the other direction? Setting up a lab ⌗ That is, given this high level view of the network…

Last week, Oskar Stenberg asked on Unix & Linux if it were possible to configure connectivity between two networks, both using the same address range, without involving network namespaces.

Iptables 1 to 1 nat netmap