Hi, similar problem with
Model: qfx5100-48s-6q Junos: 17.3R3-S4.2 Creating vlan means stop forwarding traffic for approx 3 seconds probably on trunk ports with allowed all vlans, or something like this. Pretty bad for bfd going through this ifaces. Does anyone have a similar issue? regards, Daniel -------- Původní zpráva -------- Zapnuto 12. 8. 2019 18:10, Nelson, Brian napsal: > Yep, holding at 14.1X53 for production QFX5100 also. These were sold as > east/west datacenter Layer 2 switches. If they can't figure out port > init and connection, I am wondering what purpose these switches are > supposed to serve. > > Seeing the same connection issues in EX2300/4300 with 10Gb ports in > JunOS 15/16/17. Just upgraded some flaky switches to 18.1R3-S6. Let's > see if they have it right this time. Maybe when the access switches stop > acting autistic, I will think about the QFX5100. > > Brian Nelson > > On 8/12/19 8:49 AM, Andrey Kostin wrote: >> Hi Ross, >> >> We are on 14.1X53 for our prod QFX5100. Don't do BGP, VRRP and PIM on >> them but other features are similar to yours (tried PIM once in a while >> but it behaved weird and decided just don't do it). The only problem we >> saw with them is few third-party QSFP issues, but resolved them by >> manipulating auto-negotiation iirc. >> I'm currently looking to 18.2R3 as potential candidate for next step and >> testing it on QFX5110 atm, according to release notes it has a bunch of >> fixes for bugs that were discovered in 17.x releases. Also 17.4R3 is >> going to be released in August, waiting for it for subscriber-management >> routers but it will have recent fixes for QFXs as well. In your case >> though it'll be interesting to know JTAC findings. If it's a new bug >> then it may take some time until it will be resolved. >> I'm also very suspicious when S-releases are shown as "recommended". I >> may be mistaken, but in my understanding S-releases don't undergo full >> testing routine and verified only for implemented bugfixes. >> Please share you investigation results with JTAC. >> >> Kind regards, >> Andrey Kostin >> >> >> Ross Halliday писал 2019-08-12 09:19: >>> Dear List, >>> >>> I'm curious if anybody can recommend a JUNOS release for QFX5100 that >>> is seriously stable. Right now we're on the previously-recommended >>> version 17.3R3-S1.5. Everything's been fine in testing, and suddenly >>> out of the blue there will be weird issues when I make a change. I >>> suspect maybe they are related to VSTP or LAG, or both. >>> >>> 1. Add a VLAN to a trunk port, all the access ports on that VLAN >>> completely stopped moving packets. Disable/delete disable all of the >>> broken interfaces restored function. This happened during the day. I >>> opened a JTAC ticket and they'd never heard of an issue like this, of >>> course we couldn't reproduce it. I no longer recall with confidence, >>> but I think the trunk port may have been a one-member LAG (replacement >>> of a downstream switch). >>> >>> 2. New trunk port (a two-port LACP LAG) not sending VSTP BPDUs for >>> some VLANs. I'm not sure if it was coincidence or always broken as I >>> had recently began feeding new VSTP BPDUs (thus the root bridge >>> changed) before I even looked at this. Other trunk ports did not >>> exhibit the same issue. Completely deleted the LAG and rolled back to >>> fix. This was on a fresh turnup and luckily wasn't in a topology that >>> could form a loop. >>> >>> Features I'm using include: >>> >>> - BGP >>> - OSPF >>> - PIM >>> - VSTP >>> - LACP >>> - VRRP >>> - IGMPv2 and v3 >>> - Routing-instance >>> - CoS for multicast >>> - CoS for unicast >>> - CoS classification by ingress filter >>> - IPv4-only >>> - ~7k routes in FIB (total of all tables) >>> - ~1k multicast groups >>> >>> >>> There are no automation features, no MPLS, no MC-LAG, no EVPN, VXLAN, >>> etc. These switches are L3 boxes that hand off IP to an MX core. >>> Management is in the default instance/table, everything else is in a >>> routing instance. >>> >>> These boxes have us scared to touch them outside of a window as >>> seemingly basic changes risk blowing the whole thing up. Is this a >>> case where an ancient version might be a better choice or is this >>> release a lemon? I recall that JTAC used to recommend two releases, >>> one being for if you didn't require "new features". I find myself >>> stuck between the adages of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" and >>> "Software doesn't age like wine". Given how poorly multicast seems to >>> be understood by JTAC I'm very hesitant to upgrade to significantly >>> newer releases. >>> >>> If anybody can give advice or suggestions I would appreciate it >>> immensely! >>> >>> Thanks >>> Ross >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >>> [https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjuniper-nsp&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nelson%40utdallas.edu%7C46dc3d3102a24da6321108d71f2becf6%7C8d281d1d9c4d4bf7b16e032d15de9f6c%7C0%7C0%7C637012145848697458&sdata=JDN54e8K6xG5Fh0EfTolJWr0qsVaCs6Q1GKwuYWSi2A%3D&reserved=0](https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjuniper-nsp&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nelson%40utdallas.edu%7C46dc3d3102a24da6321108d71f2becf6%7C8d281d1d9c4d4bf7b16e032d15de9f6c%7C0%7C0%7C637012145848697458&sdata=JDN54e8K6xG5Fh0EfTolJWr0qsVaCs6Q1GKwuYWSi2A%3D&reserved=0) >> _______________________________________________ >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >> [https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjuniper-nsp&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nelson%40utdallas.edu%7C46dc3d3102a24da6321108d71f2becf6%7C8d281d1d9c4d4bf7b16e032d15de9f6c%7C0%7C0%7C637012145848697458&sdata=JDN54e8K6xG5Fh0EfTolJWr0qsVaCs6Q1GKwuYWSi2A%3D&reserved=0](https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjuniper-nsp&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nelson%40utdallas.edu%7C46dc3d3102a24da6321108d71f2becf6%7C8d281d1d9c4d4bf7b16e032d15de9f6c%7C0%7C0%7C637012145848697458&sdata=JDN54e8K6xG5Fh0EfTolJWr0qsVaCs6Q1GKwuYWSi2A%3D&reserved=0) >> > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
