On 22/May/19 15:21, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> I have a sympathy for your convoluted setup, however the above argument is a
> strawman logical fallacy unless you can show how moving to Internet in a
> default table would have helped to solve the uRPF problem.
We run both Strict and Loose mode uRPF on all our routers, without
issue. Our Internet leaves in the default table, and we've never had a
uRPF issue.
I would not have foreseen a problem like the one Niall has faced, if I
were to run the Internet in a VRF. I would not have even considered it
to be a potential issue. But because of all the unknowns previously
documented with limitations when the Internet is in a VRF, as well as
what we don't already know as software continues to bloat, I simply stay
away from it. I am not suffering anything by not having our Internet in
a VRF.
It's like Broadcom chipsets on IP/MPLS routers... it's getting better
with each iteration of the silicon, but there is always a niggle you
may, or not may know about.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
