Re: [j-nsp] Path MTU Discovery - MPLS VPN

RE: vrf-mtu-check; Thanks, yes J-series its applied automatically, the M-series I'd already applied it manually. Also tried enabling ICMP-tunneling, but still no luck :( Any ideas how to debug? Thanks, Tim. -- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 20:46:01 +0500 (PKT) From: mas...@ne

Re: [j-nsp] RE : RPD soft assertion failed

On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 08:03 +0400, Yevgeniy Voloshin wrote: > but they also have KGB ;) and Borat! ;) --Daniel. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/ju

Re: [j-nsp] RE : RPD soft assertion failed

Daniel Verlouw wrote: I'll definitely follow-up on-list once we have some more news from JTAC. Oddly enough, up until now, every prefix being logged along with each coredump is originated from Eastern Europe/Russia, AS9198 being the "top talker". Daniel, AS9198 is Kazakhtelecom, Republic of

Re: [j-nsp] RSVP UDP encapsulation

juniper rsvp msgs are sent as raw IP datagrams (protcol 46), if i'm not wrong same goes for cisco. normally udp encapsulation is needed for routers that cannot do raw network i/o. BR// Masood Senior Network Operations Engineer Blog: http://weblogs.com.pk/jahil/ -Original Message- From: ju

Re: [j-nsp] RE : RPD soft assertion failed

On May 27, 2009, at 10:16 PM, Daniel Verlouw wrote: Oddly enough, up until now, every prefix being logged along with each coredump is originated from Eastern Europe/Russia, AS9198 being the "top talker". Ghe. (bottom o

[j-nsp] RSVP UDP encapsulation

Hi list. Is JUNOS able to encapsulate RSVP messages using UDP, instead of raw IP packets? I could not find any information about this on JUNOS docs Thank you again! Thiago ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether

Re: [j-nsp] RE : RPD soft assertion failed

Hi David, On May 27, 2009, at 9:18 PM, > wrote: Do you have some configuration at this level "edit protocols bgp path-selection" ? no, it's empty. Did the RPD restart ? It seems that yes : "%KERN-6: pid 12767 (rpd),uid 0: exited on signal 6 (core dumped) no, rpd actually does not restar

[j-nsp] RE : RPD soft assertion failed

Hi Daniel, Do you have some configuration at this level "edit protocols bgp path-selection" ? Did the RPD restart ? It seems that yes : "%KERN-6: pid 12767 (rpd),uid 0: exited on signal 6 (core dumped) Please, give us feedback regarding to the root cause, when you will have more info? We'v

Re: [j-nsp] RPD soft assertion failed

Hi Richard, On May 27, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: I had a similar issue (well the exact same message, but I'm assuming different root causes) back in 8.2R2. It turned out to be PR99220, and was mostly cosmetic (minus the big scary log message that looked like a rpd core du

Re: [j-nsp] RPD soft assertion failed

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:49:28AM +0200, Daniel Verlouw wrote: > Hi, > > anyone else seeing messages similar to the following? We started seeing > several of these after upgrading one of our M120s to 9.3R3.8 last night. > > May 27 10:28:05.806 2009 jun1.bit-1 rpd[1149]: % > DAEMON-3-RPD_ASSERT_

Re: [j-nsp] Olive and l2circuit

I have not tried in years, but the last I did, an olive would not do l2. All was A-ok in the control plane, but no data would flow. Sounds like what you have hit. Regards -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Beh

Re: [j-nsp] Path MTU Discovery - MPLS VPN

path mtu check requires at least one IP address must be associated with each vrf. If an IP address is not associated with the routing instance, icmp reply messages cannot be sent. BR// Masood Blog: http://weblogs.com.pk/jahil/ > Hi, > > I've been trying to get Path MTU Discovery working for M/

Re: [j-nsp] Path MTU Discovery - MPLS VPN

the vrf IP address is drawn from among the IP addresses associated with interfaces configured for that routing instance. so you meet that requirement. to enable path checks on the outgoing interface for unicast traffic routed on a VRF routing instance, you may need to include the vrf-mtu-check sta

Re: [j-nsp] Path MTU Discovery - MPLS VPN

Thanks Masood, I have an FE associated with the VRF on the CE/PE router with a /26 assigned and so I assume I meet that requirement? Should path MTU check work within the MPLS cloud ie. Say a link from the P to PE has a reduced MTU? IS there any general info out there that would help? I had a look

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bundle with LACP active

When you configure Active LACP the switch will send out and receive LACP request, it will "actively" look for peers to set up port channels with. Passive LACP will wait for a request to come in before setting up the port channel. LACP's main purpose is to verify all the member links are set up

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bundle with LACP active

Felix, When you say "disabled" LACP does that mean make both sides passive? Or one side active and the other side passive? I tryed searching the docs, but all i got out of it was that if both sides are set to passive the link will not automatically come up. What exactly does that mean? And how

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bundle with LACP active

Brendan, > When you say "disabled" LACP does that mean make both sides passive? > Or one side active and the other side passive? > > I tryed searching the docs, but all i got out of it was that if both > sides are set to passive the link will not automatically come up. What > exactly does that me

[j-nsp] Olive and l2circuit

Hi list. Was anybody able to configure/test l2circuit using olive running on virtual machines? A have a basic topology, for study purposes, everything is correctly configured but traffic don't go through the pw. Any similar experience on the list? Thank you! Thiago _

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bundle with LACP active

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 03:36:47PM -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote: > > All switches are running 9.5R1.8 > > Everyone that I've talked to inside Juniper has suggest JUNOS 9.3R3 as > the suggested version for all of my deployments, but all of my EX > boxes are 4200 virtual chassis. I'll definitely s

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bundle with LACP active

Brendan, > > just wondering if anyone else has experienced any issues with EX > switches and ae bundles. > yes, we have. > I have a 3200 with ports 0 and 1 in a ae bundle (ae0) with lacp > active. Those uplink to to a 4200 VC and land on port 0 on each > switch. Again with lacp active. > > For

[j-nsp] Path MTU Discovery - MPLS VPN

Hi, I've been trying to get Path MTU Discovery working for M/J-series, appreciate that the M-series requires vrf-mtu-check setting. Having done this I've tried testing it by launching Pings (DF set) with a larger MTU than the link, but I'm getting no response at all - expecting ICMP response. Ha

Re: [j-nsp] IPv6 best practice

Matthias, When you say parallel IPv6 network do you mean on the same infrastructure links that you use for IPv4? You can certainly do this. If you want tunnel IPv6 over IPv4 with GRE you can do this with JUNOS: http://www-jnet.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos91/swconfig-services/exa

[j-nsp] RPD soft assertion failed

Hi, anyone else seeing messages similar to the following? We started seeing several of these after upgrading one of our M120s to 9.3R3.8 last night. May 27 10:28:05.806 2009 jun1.bit-1 rpd[1149]: % DAEMON-3-RPD_ASSERT_SOFT: Soft assertion failed rpd[1149]: file "../../../../../src/juniper/usr.sb