Re: [j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-13 Thread Shane Short
Hi Chris, Just a hunch but I suspect the FIB on your EX4200 is full (I seem to recall the EX can only hold 16K routes), which is probably causing all kinds of weirdness: > inet.0: 16384 destinations, 16384 routes (16384 active, 0 holddown, 0 You probably want to filter your routes down to what yo

Re: [j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-13 Thread Jonathan Lassoff
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Chris wrote: > On 13/07/2011 3:29 PM, Ben Dale wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> > Hi all, > > Thanks for the replies - the issue is as above, the routing table was > topping out. I should have checked that - it completely slipped my mind. Nice catch, Ben! The EXes are not

Re: [j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-13 Thread Chris
On 13/07/2011 3:29 PM, Ben Dale wrote: > Hi Chris, > Hi all, Thanks for the replies - the issue is as above, the routing table was topping out. I should have checked that - it completely slipped my mind. Thanks again all! ___ juniper-nsp mailing list ju

Re: [j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-13 Thread Ben Dale
Hi Chris, At a guess, It looks like you're trying to dump 170,000 routes from your Border: > inet.0: 363930 destinations, 363932 routes (170427 active, 0 holddown, 193504 > hidden) into your core EX4200: > inet.0: 16384 destinations, 16384 routes (16384 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden) which is

Re: [j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-13 Thread Jonathan Lassoff
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Chris wrote: > On 13/07/2011 2:27 PM, Chris wrote: >> >> > To add to the already long email, here is some more examples of whats > happening: > > From the 10.10.10.100 device, trying to ping the 'acc-bdr1' (J6350) > device works: > > traceroute to 99.99.99.242 (9

Re: [j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-12 Thread Chris
On 13/07/2011 2:27 PM, Chris wrote: > > To add to the already long email, here is some more examples of whats happening: >From the 10.10.10.100 device, trying to ping the 'acc-bdr1' (J6350) device works: traceroute to 99.99.99.242 (99.99.99.242), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 10.10.10.254 (10

[j-nsp] Route Precedence

2011-07-12 Thread Chris
Hi all, I have a pair of EX4200's which are running iBGP to a pair of J6350's. I am seeing some strange behaviour with the routing on them. The EX4200's have a few different VLANs setup: vlan 50 - Used to connect to a J6350 vlan 100 - The VLAN the devices I am trying to reach are on The devices