Re: [j-nsp] Fwd: mx480 to mx240 port channel ae
What JUNOS version and linecard HW?
interface-mode trunk is supported on Trio starting from 11.1.
Thanks
Alex
- Original Message -
From: Mohammad Khalil eng.m...@gmail.com
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 6:48 AM
Subject: [j-nsp] Fwd: mx480 to mx240 port channel ae
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mohammad Khalil eng.m...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:45 AM
Subject: mx480 to mx240 port channel ae
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Hi all , I have mx480 and mx240 routers
I tried to connect them via ether channel (port aggregation) , but there
was remarkable packet loss
CR04# show interfaces ae1
flexible-vlan-tagging;
mtu 1600;
encapsulation flexible-ethernet-services;
aggregated-ether-options {
lacp {
active;
}
}
unit 0 {
family bridge {
interface-mode trunk;
}
}
unit 10 {
vlan-id 10;
family inet {
address 10.0.0.17/30;
Any ideas ?
Thanks
BR,
Mohammad
___
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
Re: [j-nsp] RE : route BGP stall bug
Hi, I have 11 groups configured, mostly eBGP. No alert messages. Also not sure if we are hitting PR722890, as we don't see the error in our logs: Cannot perform nh operation DELETE nhop (null) type unicast index 717 errno 1 As RAS confirmed the bug is still there, I'll have to work on getting as much as Multihop loopback sessions as possible and configuring a static default route towards cores to prevent blackholing (bleh...) Turns out that my ultra expensive boxes / linecards are worth rubbish in some cases :( Tim On 18-07-12 21:37, david@orange.com wrote: Hi How many groups do you have? David Roy NOC Engineer at Orange France JNCIE-SP #703 ; JNCIE-ENT #305 De : juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] de la part de Richard A Steenbergen [r...@e-gerbil.net] Date d'envoi : mercredi 18 juillet 2012 20:15 À : Tim Vollebregt Cc : Juniper-NSP Objet : Re: [j-nsp] route BGP stall bug On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:03:39AM +0200, Tim Vollebregt wrote: Hi All, This morning during a maintenance I experienced the route stall bug Richard mentioned a few times already on j-nsp. Hardware kit: -MX480 with SCB (non-e) -2 x RE-S-1800x4 -4 x MPC 3D 16x 10GE Software version: 10.4R8.5 During this maintenance I was placing 2 new routing engines into the router, replacing the 'old' RE-S-2000. This router is pushing a lot of traffic and receiving 14 x full BGP tables from eBGP peers/1 RR session to it's 'mate'/several iBGP peers with partial tables Rest assured this issue is still alive and well in every piece of code I've ever looked at. I've basically just given up and accepted that Juniper can't actually handle a large number of routes, and nobody seems capable of fixing it. EX's are especially bad, I can't get a full fib installed from a reboot in anything less than an hour, even if I turn off most of the BGP sessions so it converges faster. Either stop carrying so many routes (14x full tables = you're screwed), or go buy a Cisco. :( -- Richard A Steenbergen r...@e-gerbil.net http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC) ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] MX80 poor monitoring, packet loss to RE, SNMP not responding
So I actually don't use the FXP interface. I basically have four OSPF connections coming into my edge firewall srx cluster, and I use the loopback address advertised over OSPF to manage all of my devices. The MX80's are the only ones that seem to have a problem...am I S.O.L if I'm not using the FXP interface? Morgan On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote: Does the Juniper RE not the same as Cisco RSP. I think the control plane information all need to go to the RE, if RE had any issue, why the traffic don't have any issue? Thanks and regards, Xu Hu On 18 Jul, 2012, at 22:32, OBrien, Will obri...@missouri.edu wrote: Check your fxp0 configuration. You may be shipping return traffic out random interfaces... We are leaning toward putting all production traffic inside a virtual routing instance/chassis and using the main routing instance just for management. From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [ juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] on behalf of Morgan McLean [ wrx...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:34 AM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] MX80 poor monitoring, packet loss to RE, SNMP not responding I have a pair of MX80's that both are very unreliable in terms of trying to monitor them. Any traffic destined to the RE, be it ICMP or SNMP seems to be very hit or miss. Sometimes SNMP won't respond, pinging it gives me maybe 50% loss on average, but it passes traffic fine. This causes issues with monitoring, false alerts, etc. I realize the traffic destined for the RE is not as important, but the box is hardly loaded and among maybe 50 other juniper devices I have, EX, SRX, only these are giving me issues. Can anybody give me any insight? Thanks, Morgan ___ 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
Re: [j-nsp] MX80 poor monitoring, packet loss to RE, SNMP not responding
On 7/19/2012 5:56 PM, Morgan McLean wrote: So I actually don't use the FXP interface. I basically have four OSPF connections coming into my edge firewall srx cluster, and I use the loopback address advertised over OSPF to manage all of my devices. The MX80's are the only ones that seem to have a problem...am I S.O.L if I'm not using the FXP interface? Morgan Not at all. Management and monitoring over the loopback (in-band) is a perfectly valid and workable configuration. Knowing nothing at all about the config on your gear, I would think that the first places to look for the source of intermittent failures would be route stability and RE firewalls/policers. You said that you get intermittent ping failures to the box. Can you ssh into the box reliably? Can you ping from the box reliably to the destination that has issues pinging to the box? ...and so on... -DMM On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote: Does the Juniper RE not the same as Cisco RSP. I think the control plane information all need to go to the RE, if RE had any issue, why the traffic don't have any issue? Thanks and regards, Xu Hu On 18 Jul, 2012, at 22:32, OBrien, Will obri...@missouri.edu wrote: Check your fxp0 configuration. You may be shipping return traffic out random interfaces... We are leaning toward putting all production traffic inside a virtual routing instance/chassis and using the main routing instance just for management. From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [ juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] on behalf of Morgan McLean [ wrx...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:34 AM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] MX80 poor monitoring, packet loss to RE, SNMP not responding I have a pair of MX80's that both are very unreliable in terms of trying to monitor them. Any traffic destined to the RE, be it ICMP or SNMP seems to be very hit or miss. Sometimes SNMP won't respond, pinging it gives me maybe 50% loss on average, but it passes traffic fine. This causes issues with monitoring, false alerts, etc. I realize the traffic destined for the RE is not as important, but the box is hardly loaded and among maybe 50 other juniper devices I have, EX, SRX, only these are giving me issues. Can anybody give me any insight? Thanks, Morgan ___ 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] MX80 poor monitoring, packet loss to RE, SNMP not responding
Hi David, Do you have any firewall filter to protect RE or doing any policing of the traffic destined to RE? If, you have the filter, is it applied to loopback interface lo0.0? You need to check whether it is configured properly or applied properly or not. Best, Atif Saleem On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 3:54 AM, David Miller dmil...@tiggee.com wrote: On 7/19/2012 5:56 PM, Morgan McLean wrote: So I actually don't use the FXP interface. I basically have four OSPF connections coming into my edge firewall srx cluster, and I use the loopback address advertised over OSPF to manage all of my devices. The MX80's are the only ones that seem to have a problem...am I S.O.L if I'm not using the FXP interface? Morgan Not at all. Management and monitoring over the loopback (in-band) is a perfectly valid and workable configuration. Knowing nothing at all about the config on your gear, I would think that the first places to look for the source of intermittent failures would be route stability and RE firewalls/policers. You said that you get intermittent ping failures to the box. Can you ssh into the box reliably? Can you ping from the box reliably to the destination that has issues pinging to the box? ...and so on... -DMM On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote: Does the Juniper RE not the same as Cisco RSP. I think the control plane information all need to go to the RE, if RE had any issue, why the traffic don't have any issue? Thanks and regards, Xu Hu On 18 Jul, 2012, at 22:32, OBrien, Will obri...@missouri.edu wrote: Check your fxp0 configuration. You may be shipping return traffic out random interfaces... We are leaning toward putting all production traffic inside a virtual routing instance/chassis and using the main routing instance just for management. From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [ juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] on behalf of Morgan McLean [ wrx...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:34 AM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] MX80 poor monitoring, packet loss to RE, SNMP not responding I have a pair of MX80's that both are very unreliable in terms of trying to monitor them. Any traffic destined to the RE, be it ICMP or SNMP seems to be very hit or miss. Sometimes SNMP won't respond, pinging it gives me maybe 50% loss on average, but it passes traffic fine. This causes issues with monitoring, false alerts, etc. I realize the traffic destined for the RE is not as important, but the box is hardly loaded and among maybe 50 other juniper devices I have, EX, SRX, only these are giving me issues. Can anybody give me any insight? Thanks, Morgan ___ 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp -- Atif ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
