Fusionhub enhancements to OSPF advertising


I am running into an annoying conflict between how google VMs function and FH. I suspect that this would also be a common issue at other cloud VM providers.
I prefer to have remote phones register to the public IP of the asterisk VMs, routing over the pepvpn. That way if there is a problem with the VPN the phones re-register over public internet and keep working.
At my physical data centers, with large balance routers as hub for vpns, this is no issue. The balance. I add static routes to the balance for the local subnets if needed, (or it is sitting on that subnet already) and it advertises them.
At google, all VMs have private IPs, to which you can map public IPs.
And the VMs see their interface as being a /32, with a gateway of
Then in the google firewall/routing rules you set rules for what can talk to what.
FH has with a public IP mapped
asterisk vm has with public IP mapped
Problem is that the FH VM is advertising only on the OSPF.
Note that the FH itself does have the ability to reach all the subnet and all the public IPs. So technically it does not NEED a static route added.
If I add a static route in the FH for GW that gets advertised and does work
If I add a static route in the FH for GW that gets advertised and does NOT work. I am working with google on this, but so far their answer is “Why the hell are you adding a static route? remove that and it will work”. But if I remove that, then the route is not advertised. I have confirmed that on a regular linux VM, if I manually add a static route inside the VM (instead of in the google GUI), it is unable to reach that route. It is just not how google functions.

So - request is to be able to add “manual subnets” to advertise to vpn peers.
very similar screen as static routes, but without gateways. Just a list of subnet/masks to add (and maybe subtract?) to the automatically generated list. Seems like this could be useful for other things, and should be an easy add.

1 Like