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

Alex alex.arseniev at gmail.com
Tue May 18 15:21:22 EDT 2010


Hello there,
I believe someone from Internet could be probing Your address block including network and broadcast IP addresses on frame-relay link. Hence unnecessary "resolutions" are throttled and event logged.
Is it possible to change the /30 to /31? Same for IPv6, I'd suggest to try /126.
If not then I'd suggest to block traffic from Internet to Your /30 with FW filter unless there is a legitimate reason for Internet users to access these IPs.
Regards
Alex
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: juniper at iber-x.com 
  To: Alex ; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 4:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ssb NH: resolutions from x throttled


  Hi,

  Regardings your questions,

  1.- The encapsulation in these interfaces is frame-relay.

  2.- Addresses are public and we don't advertise this /30  link to the Internet only the general range of IP.

  3.- There isn't the same IPs in other interfaces. 
  The configuration of this particular interface is:

  lt-0/2/0 {
                  unit 101 {
                      encapsulation frame-relay;
                      dlci 100;
                      peer-unit 100;
                      family inet {
                          no-redirects;
                          address x/30;
                      }
                      family iso;
                      family inet6 {
                          y/124;
                          z/64;
                      }
                      family mpls;
                  }
  }

  Thanks for your time,



  El 17/05/2010 20:32, Alex escribió: 
    Hello there,
    May I ask some questions please?
    1/ What is the encapsulation on this link?
    2/ What are the link IP addresses: public or private? If public do you advertise these link addresses to the Internet at large?
    3/ Do these addresses overlap with addresses somewhere else in Your network? Perhaps in VRF?
    Regards
    Alex

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: juniper at iber-x.com 
      To: Alex ; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net 
      Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 4:25 PM
      Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ssb NH: resolutions from x throttled


      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 








More information about the juniper-nsp mailing list