[j-nsp] EX4550 apparently dropping IPv6 RA

[John Neiberger]

This all turned out to be a false alarm. Someone on the server team had
changed the configuration on all the servers such that they were ignoring
RAs from the MX960. Everyone thought the EX4550 wasn't passing the RAs
because the filter they used to catch them wasn't apparently catching them.
The counters for ND/NS were incrementing but the counters for RA/RS were
not. The RAs clearly are passing through the EX4550, but for whatever
reason, the filter isn't counting them. The server issue has been corrected
and everything is working now.

Thanks,
John


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Benoit Plessis <b.plessis at doyousoft.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It won't help you i fear but i did see exactly the same defect on some
> other concurrent platform (cisco 3560G).
>
> With the latest IOS software (15.x) a 3560G unit in L3 mode does
> correctly send RA and reply to RS, but the same
> unit in L2 mode between a router and a server fail to deliver RA/RS
> messages ...
> "Normal" IPv6 trafic correctly flow thru the 3560G in L2 however.
>
> Downgrading the L2 unit to a 12.xx release did solve the problem, and
> also did replacing the 3560G
> by a 2960G even in IOS 15.
>
> Looks like some packet handling code isn't correctly de-activated.
>
>
> Le 16/06/2014 07:23, John Neiberger a écrit :
> > This does seem to be specific to RA/RS. I haven't been involved in
> > troubleshooting over the weekend but the updates I read said that they
> took
> > some packet captures of RA messages from the Cisco 7600 that the switch
> > used to be connected to and compared them with captures taken from the
> > MX960. They found some differences and adjusted to the configuration to
> > make them the same, but that still did not resolve the problem. The issue
> > has been escalated with Juniper. Last I read, no one really has any idea
> > yet what is going on. They've got an action plan for tomorrow, so I'll
> know
> > more after a meeting in the morning. Sure seems awfully funky, though.
> JTAC
> > seems to be at a loss to explain what is happening.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 5:22 AM, Phil Mayers <p.mayers at imperial.ac.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 14/06/14 22:24, John Neiberger wrote:
> >>
> >>  The EX4550 is just layer two. There is no routing configured on it, so
> it
> >>> should just be passing the RAs from the router to the hosts on the
> second
> >>> switch, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
> >>>
> >> Is it RA/RS specific, or is forwarding to fe80::1 and related groups
> >> broken?
> >>
> >>
> >>  Have any of you ever seen anything quite like this?
> >> On other platforms, I've seen IPv6 link-local multicast fail to flow as
> >> some tiny table, sized with IPv4 assumptions, overflowed.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>