[j-nsp] OSPF Debug

Chris Summers csummers at juniper.net
Sun Feb 22 23:04:02 EST 2004


Unnumbered links should only be used on pt-pt type interfaces and not on 
broadcast interfaces.

Would it be possible to see the entire ospf and corresponding interface 
configs from both routers?
Is there any firewall filter applied to either interface?


At 09:32 PM 2/22/2004 -0500, Scotty wrote:
> > I'd suggest doing some 'traceoptions hello detail' and that'd capture
> > the hello packets on both routers. Also, I personally like to do
> > monitor traffic on the interfaces as it is simpler to see if you
> > receives the OSPF packets on the interfaces from the other routers.
>Ok I did that on the M160 and I get this (summarized)
># run monitor traffic interface ge-0/0/0.0
>verbose output suppressed, use <detail> or <extensive> for full protocol
>Listening on ge-0/0/0.0, capture size 96 bytes
>21:04:35.454751 Out IP > OSPFv2 Hello length: 44
>21:04:41.121834  In IP > P
>3886338746:3886338773(27) ack 145002704 win 16384 <nop,nop,timestamp
>1665163887 130574421>: BGP, length: 27
>21:04:43.285516 Out IP > OSPFv2 Hello length: 44
>21:04:51.466302 Out IP > OSPFv2 Hello length: 44
>21:04:51.619965  In IP > P 27:111(84) ack 1
>win 16384 <nop,nop,timestamp 1665164936 130575218>: BGP, length: 84
>94 packets received by filter
>0 packets dropped by kernel
>The monitored box is the M160 (down state)  As I can see there is
>nothing seen on the from .4 ..  yet tcp seems to work fine as you
>can see the BGP session is active.
> > The "attempt" state is interesting. Does it really say that? The
> > M20 is in 'init' state, so it is seeing the hello's from the M160.
> > And so, the question is whether the M160 is receiving the hello
> > packets and if it is rejecting them for some reasons.
>Correction, "Attempt" only happens in un-numbered mode..  dead time counts
>down to zero and it goes to "down"  From what I can tell its not getting the
>packets.  Why I wonder.
>The hello detail stuff on the M20 shows that .4 does indeed send hello
>packets to
>Feb 22 21:19:46 OSPF sent Hello -> (ge-0/3/0.0, IFL 36)
>Feb 22 21:19:46   Version 2, length 48, ID, area
>Feb 22 21:19:46   checksum 0xffff, authtype 65535
>Feb 22 21:19:46   mask, hello_ivl 10, opts 0x2, prio 128
>Feb 22 21:19:46   dead_ivl 40, DR 1010.10.4, BDR
> > My guess is that when you tried using ip addresses on the interfaces,
> > you can ping between the routers because the bgp session is working.
> > Are you using the GE ip addresses for your bgp endpoints? If you are
> > using the loopback addresses, they may not go through this GE link.
>Correct iBGP peer to the localhost IP (router-id) did not work, makes sense
>though there is no IGP on the M160. so this peer is setup direct to the GE
>interface IP's
> > Let me know what you find! I am quite sure there aren't any changes
> > between 5.6 and 6.2 in basic OSPF that may cause this problem but I'll
> > set it up myself and verify that. Thanks.
>Right, looking at the release notes I don't see anything shocking.
>juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net

More information about the juniper-nsp mailing list