[j-nsp] Load Balancing IPv6 Traffic Flows

[Eric Van Tol]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Stefan Fouant
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:57 PM
> To: Juniper-Nsp
> Subject: [j-nsp] Load Balancing IPv6 Traffic Flows
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Has anyone on the list experienced any issues when attempting to
> load-balance IPv6 traffic flows?
>
> Whenever I attempt to commit my configuration to load-balance traffic
> flows, whether I am using a route-filter or a prefix-list-filter to
> match on IPv6 routes, as in the following:
>
> routing-options {
>     forwarding-table {
>         export load-balance;
>     }
> }
> policy-options {
>     policy-statement load-balance {
>         term prefixes {
>             from {
>                 route-filter 2001:xxx:dead:beef::/48 orlonger;
>                 prefix-list-filter v4_routes orlonger;
>             }
>             then {
>                 load-balance per-packet;
>             }
>         }
>     }
> }
>
> or
>
> routing-options {
>     forwarding-table {
>         export load-balance;
>     }
> }
> policy-options {
>     policy-statement load-balance {
>         term prefixes {
>             from {
>                 prefix-list-filter v4_routes orlonger;
>                 prefix-list-filter v6_routes orlonger;
>             }
>             then {
>                 load-balance per-packet;
>             }
>         }
>     }
> }
>
> I get the following error:
>
> {master}[edit]
> sfouant at rtrxxxx-re1# commit synchronize
> re1:
> error: Check-out failed for Routing protocols process (/usr/sbin/rpd)
> without details
> error: configuration check-out failed
>
> According to PR 237457, this error message is generated when more
> than
> one prefix-list statement is included at the [edit policy-options
> policy-statement statement-name term term-name from] hierarchy level
> and one of the prefix lists is empty.  I have verified however that
> all of my prefix-lists are indeed *not empty* and in fact, as I
> mentioned previously, I am seeing this problem exhibit itself using
> route-filters as well.  Apparently this problem was fixed in JUNOS
> 8.4... I am running JUNOS 8.2R4.5.
>
> I'm wondering if anyone else has seen any similar problems and are
> there any gotchya's when configuring load-balancing for IPv6 traffic.
>
> Thanks for your help!
>
> Stefan Fouant
> Principal Network Engineer
> NeuStar, Inc. - http://www.neustar.biz

I would try breaking out the v4 and v6 policies into separate terms, as opposed to having them both listed in the same term.

-evt