+ Programmed: YES + Total TCAM entries available: 1788 + Total TCAM entries installed : 516
Brendan Mannella TeraSwitch Inc. Main - 1.412.945.7045 Direct - 1.412.945.7049 eFax - 1.412.945.7049 Colocation . Cloud . Connectivity ---- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi> wrote: > Hey Brendan, > > This is news to me, but plausible. Can you do this for me > > start shell pfe network fpc0 > show filter > <pick your lo0 filter from above> > show filter hw <from above> show_term_info > > Compare how many TCAM entries are needed, and how many are available. > > Also if you can take a risk of reloading the FPC run: > show filter hw <from above> show_terms_brcm > > This may crash your PFE, if you actually did not have all of the > entries programmed in HW. > > > commit will succeed if you build filter which will not fit in HW, > there should be syslog entry, but no complain during commit. You will > end up having no filter or some mangled version of it. So it's just > alternative theory on why you may be accepting something you thought > you aren't. > > > On 4 December 2017 at 18:02, Brendan Mannella <bmanne...@teraswitch.com> > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > So i have been testing QFX5100 product for use as a core L3 switch/router > > with BGP/OSPF. I have my standard RE filter blocking various things > > including BGP from any unknown peer. I started to receive errors in my > logs > > showing BGP packets getting through from hosts that weren't allowed. > After > > digging around i found that Juniper apparently has built in ACL to allow > > BGP, which bypasses my ACLs, probably for VCF or something.. Is there any > > way to disable this behavior or does anyone have any other suggestions? > > > > root@XXX% cprod -A fpc0 -c "show filter hw dynamic 47 show_terms" > > > > Filter name : dyn-bgp-pkts > > Filter enum : 47 > > Filter location : IFP > > List of tcam entries : [(total entries: 2) > > Entry: 37 > > - Unit 0 > > - Entry Priority 0x7FFFFFFC > > - Matches: > > PBMP 0x00000001fffffffffffffffc > > PBMP xe > > L4 SRC Port 0x000000B3 mask 0x0000FFFF > > IP Protocol 0x00000006 mask 0x000000FF > > L3DestHostHit 1 1 > > - Actions: > > ChangeCpuQ > > ColorIndependent param1: 1, param2: 0 > > CosQCpuNew cosq: 30 > > Implicit Counter > > Entry: 38 > > - Unit 0 > > - Entry Priority 0x7FFFFFFC > > - Matches: > > PBMP 0x00000001fffffffffffffffc > > PBMP xe > > L4 DST Port 0x000000B3 mask 0x0000FFFF > > IP Protocol 0x00000006 mask 0x000000FF > > L3DestHostHit 1 1 > > - Actions: > > ChangeCpuQ > > ColorIndependent param1: 1, param2: 0 > > CosQCpuNew cosq: 30 > > Implicit Counter > > ] > > _______________________________________________ > > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > > > > -- > ++ytti > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp