[j-nsp] ssb NH: resolutions from x throttled

[juniper at iber-x.com]

Hi,

Our router M20 is divided in two logical routers, one is the physical 
and the other is the logical. And it is in the logical tunnel interface, 
lt-0/2/0, where the problem are. And it is only in that two interfaces 
where we've thought to apply the statement: 'proxy-arp'. What is it your 
opinion about the implementation in this scenario?

Do you have any other idea to solve this message in our Juniper's log 
without make a JUNO's upgrade? I would appreciate it because we are 
trying to solve it for a long time without success.

Thanks,


El 17/05/2010 11:16, Alex escribió:
> I am sure You realise "proxy-arp" is an ARP Response function:
>
> Warning: If you configure unrestricted proxy ARP, the proxy router 
> replies to ARP requests for the target IP address on the same 
> interface as the incoming ARP request.
> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos90/swconfig-network-interfaces/configuring-unrestricted-proxy-arp.html 
>
>
> So if You have another JUNOS box sitting on the same PE-CE subnet with 
> M20, and M20 has traffic coming in from its core-facing interface and 
> addressed to unassigned IP addresses on said subnet, You can always 
> configure "proxy-arp" on that other JUNOS box in order to respond to 
> M20 and keep poor old M20 happy...
>
> Cheers
> Alex
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: <juniper at iber-x.com>
> To: "Christoph Blecker" <admin at toph.ca>; <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 10:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ssb NH: resolutions from x throttled
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Yes, we had read this upgrade recomendation but we are looking for an
> alternative solution. How I said, we read that there is a possibility to
> set a 'proxy-arp' option for a particular interface
> (http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos90/swconfig-network-interfaces/configuring-unrestricted-proxy-arp.html) 
>
> and maybe it exists a statement for the opposite because we think that
> perhaps it will solve the 'problem'.
>
> Set this statement is only one idea (probably it doesn't work) but, does
> anyone have another idea?
>
> Thanks for your help and time,
>
>
> El 17/05/2010 10:18, Christoph Blecker escribió:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hello,
>> The issue appears to be a bug in the JUNOS version you are running. A
>> quick Google search turned up the following:
>>
>> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos73/rn-sw-73/previous-releases.html 
>>
>>
>> "If a router receives rapid multicast traffic from various groups or
>> sources that do not have entries in the forwarding table, the router
>> might generate the ?router-name feb NH: resolutions from iif number
>> throttled? system log message and might delay the installation of
>> forwarding table entries for some of these multicast packets. [PR/46474:
>> This issue has been resolved.]"
>>
>> Solution would be to review your hardware and upgrade your JUNOS version
>> as applicable. ARP resolution is a normal and necessary funtion of the
>> router, and you would not want to disable it (I'm not even sure there
>> *is* a way to disable it withing JUNOS).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - -Christoph
>>
>> On 10-05-17 01:43 AM, juniper at iber-x.com wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> We have a Juniper M20 with JUNOS 7.3R1.4, old version :( .. and since
>>> few we have in our log these entries:
>>>
>>> May 10 23:49:48.177 2010  xxxxx ssb NH: resolutions from iif 73 
>>> throttled
>>> May 10 23:50:41.168 2010  xxxxx ssb NH: resolutions from iif 88 
>>> throttled
>>> ..
>>>
>>> Someone told us that maybe was a  port/ip scan on an Ethernet subnet 
>>> and
>>> this causes a flood of ARP requests.
>>> We found that there is a statement to set the 'proxy-arp' option:
>>>
>>> [edit]
>>> user at host# set interfaces interface-name unit logical-unit-number 
>>> proxy-arp
>>>
>>> But we can't find the opposite statement, I mean that the router 
>>> doesn't
>>> register any arp resolution in one interface.
>>>
>>> Also we read that it was a problem [PR/46474] solved since the version
>>> 7.3R3 but we have an older JUNOS version..
>>>
>>> Does anyone know how to solve this 'problem'?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAkvxCdsACgkQg4DtNh1wGhrzaQCfbYbgJQAFUg5O/Gg/KTshJBoi
>> pz8AnAqD659S7c2PFCE+c2XlIo1yGWQb
>> =wANs
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>