[j-nsp] Asymmetric Routing

Dave Bell me at geordish.org
Tue Oct 13 09:41:21 EDT 2015

Alternatively drop the iBGP session between the two MX80s. Depending
on the topology, it may not be needed.


On 13 October 2015 at 14:38, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
> On 13/Oct/15 15:18, Dave Bell wrote:
>> Packet is sent to the EX. It does a route lookup, and has its default
>> route set at MX80 A. Packet is forwarded to MX80 A.
>> Packet is received by MX80 A. It does a route lookup, and the best
>> route is via MX80 B. Packet is forwarded to EX.
>> EX receives packet. It does a route lookup. Default route is via...
> This is exactly what I am thinking the issue is.
> No way the EX4550 can handle a full table (two, moreover) coming from
> the MX80's.
> I'd say dump the EX4500 into Layer 2-only mode, run VRRP between the
> MX80's, and Bob's the other thing...
> Mark.

More information about the juniper-nsp mailing list