[j-nsp] OSPF log messages

Tue Aug 17 01:46:55 EDT 2004

Cheers Paul... There is firewall and IDP between the two sets of routers which have terms to allow traffic to the OSPF multicast groups - however, there was no term to allow OSPF unicast packets to pass so that the neighbors could negotiate the master/slave roles and so they were stuck in exstart. 

thanks for the help everyone... 

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Goyette [mailto:pgoyette at juniper.net]
Sent: 16 August 2004 19:29
To: Jack.W.Parks at alltel.com; Robert Walton; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] OSPF log messages

You're not receiving a corresponding DbD packet from your
neighbors.  If there was an MTU mismatch, it would be
detected by comparing your MTU with the value in a received
DbD packet, but you're apparently not receiving any DbD
from the neighbors.

The I bit is still set in the DbDs you're sending out, so
you're still negoriating which router will be master and
which is slave.  No actual DD contents are being exchanged
yet.

Check the far side to see what it is receiving and maybe
sending...

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of
Jack.W.Parks at alltel.com
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 11:12 AM
To: robert.walton at ffastfill.com; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] OSPF log messages

Timer (Hello/Dead) mismatches?

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert Walton
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 11:27 AM
To: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] OSPF log messages

Hi,

	I'm seeing Hello packets being exchanged no problem however the
when i trace the database-description packets i see the following
continuously in the logs.

Aug 16 17:20:53 OSPF resend last DBD to 217.27.24.34
Aug 16 17:20:53 OSPF resend last DBD to 217.27.24.44
Aug 16 17:20:53 OSPF sent DbD 217.27.24.45 -> 217.27.24.34
(fe-0/3/1.212, IFL 0x56)
Aug 16 17:20:53   Version 2, length 32, ID 146.101.129.217, area 0.0.0.0
Aug 16 17:20:53   checksum 0x0, authtype 0
Aug 16 17:20:53   options 0x42, i 1, m 1, ms 1, seq 0x926fe06b, mtu 1500
Aug 16 17:20:53 OSPF sent DbD 217.27.24.45 -> 217.27.24.44
(fe-0/3/1.212, IFL 0x56)
Aug 16 17:20:53   Version 2, length 32, ID 146.101.129.217, area 0.0.0.0
Aug 16 17:20:53   checksum 0x0, authtype 0
Aug 16 17:20:53   options 0x42, i 1, m 1, ms 1, seq 0x926ea536, mtu 1500
Aug 16 17:20:58 OSPF resend last DBD to 217.27.24.34
Aug 16 17:20:58 OSPF sent DbD 217.27.24.45 -> 217.27.24.34
(fe-0/3/1.212, IFL 0x56)
Aug 16 17:20:58   Version 2, length 32, ID 146.101.129.217, area 0.0.0.0
Aug 16 17:20:58   checksum 0x0, authtype 0
Aug 16 17:20:58   options 0x42, i 1, m 1, ms 1, seq 0x926fe06b, mtu 1500
Aug 16 17:20:58 OSPF resend last DBD to 217.27.24.44
Aug 16 17:20:58 OSPF sent DbD 217.27.24.45 -> 217.27.24.44
(fe-0/3/1.212, IFL 0x56)
Aug 16 17:20:58   Version 2, length 32, ID 146.101.129.217, area 0.0.0.0
Aug 16 17:20:58   checksum 0x0, authtype 0
Aug 16 17:20:58   options 0x42, i 1, m 1, ms 1, seq 0x926ea536, mtu 1500
Aug 16 17:21:01 OSPF resend last DBD to 217.27.24.34

I've checked the MTU at both ends and they are fine so there shouldn't
be a problem of one neighbor sending DBD's larger than the MTU... I've
also performed large pings to all adjacencies.

waltonro at FFALCR002A> ping 217.27.24.34 size 10000
PING 217.27.24.34 (217.27.24.34): 10000 data bytes
10008 bytes from 217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=29.623 ms 10008
bytes from 217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=17.913 ms 10008 bytes
from 217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=17.699 ms 10008 bytes from
217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=17.733 ms 10008 bytes from
217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=18.050 ms 10008 bytes from
217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=5 ttl=255 time=27.562 ms 10008 bytes from
217.27.24.34: icmp_seq=6 ttl=255 time=17.812 ms ^C
--- 217.27.24.34 ping statistics ---
8 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 12% packet loss round-trip
min/avg/max/stddev = 17.699/20.913/29.623/4.889 ms

waltonro at FFALCR002A> ping 217.27.24.44 size 10000
PING 217.27.24.44 (217.27.24.44): 10000 data bytes
10008 bytes from 217.27.24.44: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=19.937 ms 10008
bytes from 217.27.24.44: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=17.728 ms 10008 bytes
from 217.27.24.44: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=17.455 ms 10008 bytes from
217.27.24.44: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=17.621 ms ^C
--- 217.27.24.44 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip
min/avg/max/stddev = 17.455/18.185/19.937/1.016 ms

So there shouldn't be any layer-2 issues, can anyone point me in the
direction of where i can go from here??

cheers,
Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: Jody Holmes [mailto:skwire at skwire.net]
Sent: 16 August 2004 09:26
To: Robert Walton
Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] OSPF log messages

*
Quoting "Robert Walton" <robert.walton at FFastFill.com>
@ (8/16/2004 2:18:35 AM):

> Quick question for you OSPf experts, what does the following log
> message mean? [Time stamp] OSPF periodic xmit from w.x.y.z to
> 224.0.0.5 (IFL 78)

That address is the AllOSPFRouters multicast address.  OSPF Hello
packets are sent out on this address.  The only time Hello packets are
unicast is on an NBMA segment.

--
Jody Holmes   [~]  |  "Have no fear of perfection --
skwire at skwire.net  |   you'll never reach it."  S. Dali

________________________________________________________________________
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
security at ffastfill.com

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the FFastFill Email
Security System.
________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
****************************************************************************
**************
The information contained in this message, including attachments, may
contain
privileged or confidential information that is intended to be delivered only
to the
person identified above. If you are not the intended recipient, or the
person
responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, ALLTEL
requests
that you immediately notify the sender and asks that you do not read the
message or its
attachments, and that you delete them without copying or sending them to
anyone else.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

________________________________________________________________________
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
security at ffastfill.com

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the FFastFill Email
Security System.
________________________________________________________________________