Hi Andrew, Your log indicate new prefix could not be installed in the feb. In my experience, there is no other way than restarting feb. You need to restart them carefully. Be careful, sometimes the old box didn't work properly, so you cannot remote it after restarting feb.
Better if you replace with a new one like Eric said. Regards, On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 11:00 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Send juniper-nsp mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of juniper-nsp digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. (no subject) (M.Mihailidis) > 2. M10 FEB problems (Andrew Degtiariov) > 3. Re: asn32: as-path formatting ? (Per Nihlen) > 4. Re: M10 FEB problems (Eric Van Tol) > 5. NetScreen-Remote issues (Sven Juergensen (KielNET)) > 6. 10GE xe-0/0/0 traffic anomaly (Witold Koscielniak) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 12:00:17 +0300 > From: "M.Mihailidis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [j-nsp] (no subject) > To: "Juniper-Nsp" <[email protected]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hello I need help with one how do I configure the policy mentioned? I make > a > dialup from a pc and this is what I get: > > > > IKE<xx.xx.xx.xx> Phase 2 msg ID <37ec7e6c>: Negotiations have > failed.2008-05-19 12:16:18infoIKE<85.72.37.175> > > > > Phase 2: No policy exists for the proxy ID received: local ID > (<192.168.0.0>/<255.255.0.0>, <0>, <0>) remote ID > (<10.251.251.1>/<255.255.255.255>, <0>, <0>) > > .2008-05-19 12:16:18infoRejected an IKE packet on adsl1 from > xx.xx.xx.xx:4500 to 213.16.178.92:4500 with cookies 6012b2b9a2752f79 and > ce394dc19b786a53 > > because the peer sent a proxy ID that did not match the one in the SA > config.2008-05-19 12:16:18infoIKE<85.72.37.175> > > Phase 2: No policy exists for the proxy ID received: local ID > (<192.168.0.0>/<255.255.0.0>, <0>, <0>) remote ID > (<10.251.251.1>/<255.255.255.255>, <0>, <0>). > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 13:01:52 +0300 > From: "Andrew Degtiariov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [j-nsp] M10 FEB problems > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Hello. > I have expected problems with Full view on M10 router. > Some of directly (L3 I mean) connected customers can't see anything > except his default gateway (there is IP on this M10) > > In logs I see a log of similar entries: > ... > May 19 12:54:16 hosto /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 3 (PREFIX CHANGE) > failed, err 5 (Invalid) > May 19 12:54:16 hosto feb RT: Failed prefix change IPv4:0 - > 66.254.124/24, nh 262186, ifidx 0, nhifl 0, flag 0x10, cos 0 > May 19 12:54:16 hosto feb RT: Failed prefix change IPv4:0 - > 66.254.124/24 (unknown prefix) > ... > > There some of diagnostics: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> show chassis feb > FEB status: > Temperature 33 degrees C / 91 degrees F > CPU utilization 7 percent > Interrupt utilization 1 percent > Heap utilization 99 percent > Buffer utilization 51 percent > Total CPU DRAM 64 MB > Internet Processor II Version 1, Foundry IBM, Part number > 9 > Start time: 2008-05-19 11:50:04 EEST > Uptime: 11 minutes, 18 seconds > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > .. from vty feb: > show nhdb zone > Chip Start Size Rsvd Used/Hi Water/Total Size Name > ---- ----- ----- ----- -------------------- ---- ---- > 0 20000 01000 00000 0/0/512 8 Multicast RTP > 0 21000 02400 00000 0/0/9216 1 Multicast Lists > 0 23400 0d400 00006 183/183/54272 1 Next-Hop Entries > 0 30800 4f800 0004b 826/826/162816 2 L2 Descriptors > 0 40400 001ff 00000 8/8/63 8 L2 Programs > 1 20000 01000 00000 0/0/512 8 Multicast RTP > 1 21000 02400 00000 0/0/9216 1 Multicast Lists > 1 23400 0d400 00006 0/0/54272 1 Next-Hop Entries > 1 30800 4f800 0004b 0/0/162816 2 L2 Descriptors > 1 40400 001ff 00000 1/1/63 8 L2 Programs > > show memory > ID Base Total(b) Free(b) Used(b) % Name > -- -------- --------- --------- --------- --- ----------- > 0 755310 51031280 108816 50922464 99 Kernel > 1 93800000 8388608 4087636 4300972 51 Uncached > > Any recommendations to fix this problem? > > PS. JUNOS 7.5R2.8 > > -- > Andrew Degtiariov > DA-RIPE > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 11:24:35 +0200 > From: Per Nihlen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] asn32: as-path formatting ? > To: Daniel Roesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Juniper-NSP Mailing list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > On May 17, 2008, at 4:10 AM, Daniel Roesen wrote: > > > On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 02:32:42PM -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > >> As numbers greater than 65535, like they freaking should be. > >> > >> :'s don't belong in IP addresses > >> .'s don't belong in ASNs > >> > >> Thank you Juniper. > > > > I couldn't agree more. Finally some vendor who didn't drink the > > "asdot" > > kool-aid and did the Sensible Thing. > > > > Juniper supports it from 9.2, I'm currently BETA testing it. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] set routing-options autonomous-system ? > Possible completions: > <as_number> Autonomous system number in plain number or > 'higher 16bits'.'Lower 16 bits' (asdot notation) format > asdot-notation Use AS-Dot notation to display true 4 byte AS > numbers > loops Maximum number of times this AS can be in an AS > path > [edit] > > You can type the ASN in what ever format you like in option > "<as_number>" , the show commands will then still be in "asplain". If > you choose "asdot-notation" the show commands will show the ASNs in as- > dot. > > So basically you can choose to drink the kool-aid or not. (I > personally choose not to) > > -- > Per Nihlen > NORDUNet > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 06:11:28 -0400 > From: Eric Van Tol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] M10 FEB problems > To: "'Andrew Degtiariov'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:juniper-nsp- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Degtiariov > > Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 6:02 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [j-nsp] M10 FEB problems > > > > Hello. > > I have expected problems with Full view on M10 router. > > Some of directly (L3 I mean) connected customers can't see anything > > except his default gateway (there is IP on this M10) > > > > In logs I see a log of similar entries: > > ... > > Any recommendations to fix this problem? > > > > PS. JUNOS 7.5R2.8 > > > > -- > > Andrew Degtiariov > > DA-RIPE > > > Yes. If you absolutely require full routes on this router, upgrade the > memory in your cFEB to 128M. Your heap utilization is at 99%, so the cFEB > is dropping routing updates. If you don't need full routes, apply an import > filter to the BGP process to prevent so many routes from being installed > into the FIB. > > -evt > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 12:37:55 +0200 > From: "Sven Juergensen (KielNET)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [j-nsp] NetScreen-Remote issues > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi list, > > I'm facing recurring issues with the NetScreen-Remote > under Windows XP SP2. $SOMETHING every now and then > fubars the installation and a formerly working VPN > out of the sudden won't budge anymore. Most of the time > the client installed something and this happens. Some > older installations of windows also seem to disallow the > software to work entirely. I went through the resolution > path outlined in [1] but to no avail. > > Several machines were set up completely new and those > w/o that option were cleansed registry- and filewise. > On some machines this works, on others it's "sucks to > be you". > > Are there any free or commercial VPN Clients under active > development anyone can confirm to work with the ScreenOS > 6.x tree? > > Being aware that more than one VPN client on the same > machine usually results in conflicts, I'm looking for > something less prone to issues. I miss the client from > Cisco, which was way more stable and less susceptible > to conflicts than the Safenet client is. > > Any pointers appreciated. > > Cheers, > > sven03 > > [1] > > http://kb.juniper.net/kb/documents/public/resolution_path/J_FW_VPN_Config_or_Trblsh.htm > > Mit freundlichen Gruessen > > i. A. Sven Juergensen > > - -- > Fachbereich > Informationstechnologie > > KielNET GmbH > Gesellschaft fuer Kommunikation > Preusserstr. 1-9, 24105 Kiel > > Telefon : 0431 / 2219-053 > Telefax : 0431 / 2219-005 > E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet: http://www.kielnet.de > > Geschaeftsfuehrer Eberhard Schmidt > HRB 4499 (Amtsgericht Kiel) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkgxWIMACgkQnEU7erAt4TJDEACZAV+Ow46uWpC038mAaKzO7UjL > wtUAoKDNNpCOt2iSCtJhn3QitVQm42aq > =UeJy > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 13:40:57 +0200 > From: Witold Koscielniak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [j-nsp] 10GE xe-0/0/0 traffic anomaly > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > I have new m120 connected on stick to the Extreme switch. > > 10GE > m120<-------------->summit<-----> > in=2 x out(??) in=out > > > M120 has only one interface - xe-0/0/0 with many 802.1q subinterfaces. > So traffic on xe-0/0/0 should be exactly symmetrical (in/out = 1) but it is > not!! > > Mrtg shows that traffic on 10G summit is exactly symmetrical but on > xe-0/0/0 > is asymmetrical: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> monitor interface traffic > Interface Link Input bytes (bps) Output bytes > (bps) > xe-0/0/0 Up 61944473131097 (318338324) 30951930138936 (156175948) > > Input traffic is approximatly twice geater than output (in/out = 2). > > What is happen? Why input traffic is greater than output traffic. > What doubled input traffic on xe-0/0/0? > > Before installing M120 I had: > > LACP 2x1GE > m5<-------------->summit<-----> > <--------------> > ae0 > > and everything was ok (in was eq out on ae0)!!!! > > Any idea? > > > -- > Witold Ko?cielniak > Network Administrator > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > > End of juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 66, Issue 26 > ******************************************* > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
