[j-nsp] ARP resolution algorithm? Storage of MX transit packets?

Robert Raszuk robert at raszuk.net
Thu Jan 31 03:34:45 EST 2019

As mentioned on the other thread decent routers should resolve peer's IP to
mac when creating FIB adj and building rewrite entries.

There is no "first packet" notion nor any ARPing driven by packet
reception. This should apply to p2p adj as well as p2mp - classic LANs.

Are you guys saying that say MXes don't do that ?


On Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 09:26 Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de wrote:

> Hi,
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:10:32AM +0200, Saku Ytti wrote:
> > I wish some vendor would implement static DIP=>DADDR resolution, there
> Can you do static ARP entries on JunOS?  You can do that on Cisco - while
> not exactly what you might have had in mind, it would be theoretically
> possible to have management system turn off ARP resolution for certain
> VLANs and put static ARP entries into the config.
> (I had to use it in the past due to ARP and ND bugs at peering routers,
> so I know "it works for a small number of entries" - no idea if it would
> scale, or whether Cisco properly programs static ARP into HW right
> away, or just uses it for lookups when punting)
> gert
> --
> "If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
>  feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never
> doubted
>  it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
>                              Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh
> Mistress
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
> gert at greenie.muc.de
> _______________________________________________
> 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