Did you confirm by serial number that you were effected? The reason I ask is we had a pair of RE1800's that matched on part number but after JTAC ran the serial numbers they re-assured us that we were not actually effected (which is kind of scary in itself).
Paul On 2013-10-07 7:58 PM, "Pierre-Yves Maunier" <j-...@maunier.org> wrote: >Hello, > >I have affected REs, and before I had the knowledge of the KB, I found a >workaround to repair the filesystem because the TAC was unable to tell me >anything about this KB. > >After an upgrade from 12.2R1.8 to 12.3R4.6 I got this : > >=================== Bootstrap installer starting =================== >Initialized the environment >Routing engine model is RE-S-1800x4 >HW model is Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU C5518 @ 1.73GHz >[: kontron: unexpected operator >Discovered that flash disk = ad0 , hard disk = ad1 >mount: /dev/ad1s1f : Invalid argument >ERROR: mount_partition: Mount /dev/ad1s1f /mnt failed >You are now in a debugging subshell (you may not see a prompt) ># > >And after a reboot I got this : > >Automatic reboot in progress... >** /dev/ad1s1a >FILE SYSTEM CLEAN; SKIPPING CHECKS >clean, 1673532 free (124 frags, 209176 blocks, 0.0% fragmentation) >** /dev/ad1s1e >FILE SYSTEM CLEAN; SKIPPING CHECKS >clean, 201639 free (31 frags, 25201 blocks, 0.0% fragmentation) >Cannot find file system superblock >32 is not a file system superblock >28740192 is not a file system superblock >** /dev/ad1s1f > > >LOOK FOR ALTERNATE SUPERBLOCKS? yes > > >SEARCH FOR ALTERNATE SUPER-BLOCK FAILED. YOU MUST USE THE >-b OPTION TO FSCK TO SPECIFY THE LOCATION OF AN ALTERNATE >SUPER-BLOCK TO SUPPLY NEEDED INFORMATION; SEE fsck(8). >tunefs: /var: could not read superblock to fill out disk >mount: /dev/ad1s1f : Invalid argument >WARNING: >WARNING: /var mount failed, building emergency /var >WARNING: >Creating initial configuration...mgd: commit complete >Setting initial options: debugger_on_panic=NO debugger_on_break=NO. >Starting optional daemons: usbd. >Doing initial network setup: >. >Initial interface configuration: > > >So the /var partition on /dev/ad1s1f (SSD) needed a fsck but it failed >because of a 'bad superblock' > >Going in the shell as root, I issued the following command to get a lisk >of >'backup' super-blocks : > >root@CORE-01% newfs -N /dev/ad1s1f >/dev/ad1s1f: 18342.8MB (37566076 sectors) block size 16384, fragment size >2048 > using 100 cylinder groups of 183.69MB, 11756 blks, 23552 inodes. >super-block backups (for fsck -b #) at: > 32, 376224, 752416, 1128608, 1504800, 1880992, 2257184, 2633376, 3009568, > 3385760, 3761952, 4138144, 4514336, 4890528, 5266720, 5642912, 6019104, > 6395296, 6771488, 7147680, 7523872, 7900064, 8276256, 8652448, 9028640, > 9404832, 9781024, 10157216, 10533408, 10909600, 11285792, 11661984, >12038176, > 12414368, 12790560, 13166752, 13542944, 13919136, 14295328, 14671520, > 15047712, 15423904, 15800096, 16176288, 16552480, 16928672, 17304864, > 17681056, 18057248, 18433440, 18809632, 19185824, 19562016, 19938208, > 20314400, 20690592, 21066784, 21442976, 21819168, 22195360, 22571552, > 22947744, 23323936, 23700128, 24076320, 24452512, 24828704, 25204896, > 25581088, 25957280, 26333472, 26709664, 27085856, 27462048, 27838240, > 28214432, 28590624, 28966816, 29343008, 29719200, 30095392, 30471584, > 30847776, 31223968, 31600160, 31976352, 32352544, 32728736, 33104928, > 33481120, 33857312, 34233504, 34609696, 34985888, 35362080, 35738272, > 36114464, 36490656, 36866848, 37243040 > >Then this command fixed the problem (376224 is the first super-block after >'32' which seem to have an issue) : > >root@CORE-01% fsck_ufs -y -b 376224 /dev/ad1s1f > >Does anyone knows what is the 'software solution' that 'has also been >developed to correct the affected REs in the field' as said in the KB ? > >Pierre-Yves > > > >2013/10/4 Phil Mayers <p.may...@imperial.ac.uk> > >> Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi> wrote: >> >On (2013-10-03 18:08 -0400), Paul Stewart wrote: >> > >> >> "Article is in review and not yet ready for viewing" >> > >> >http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=TSB16210 >> > >> >> >> >> >> >>http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=S:TSB16164&smlogin >>= >> > >> >-- >> > ++ytti >> >_______________________________________________ >> >juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >> >> Thanks, this is very useful - does look like our new REs are affected >>:o( >> >> Will contact support to get the fix implemented. >> -- >> Sent from my phone with, please excuse brevity and typos >> _______________________________________________ >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >> >_______________________________________________ >juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp