--- Begin Message ---
Nikolas,
I have been running into "committed config doesn't match operational reality"
issues with JunOS since at least 16.1. I've seen this under protocol bgp,
firewall filters, etc.
My issues appear apply-group related. Are your affected BGP policies achieved
via apply-group inheritance? Do you use " system commit delta-export " or "
system commit persist-groups-inheritance" ?
I was a bit skeptical but JTAC pointed me to PR1357802. Public notes were not
an exact match of my symptoms by any means (I was not experiencing RPD
crashes), but the JTAC engineer implied that there were some more holistic
apply-group fixes as part of this release. Smoke might have been blown but we
were targeting 18.X releases in our lab so it was easy to test.
I haven't been able to reliability reproduce the problem in either release
(16.x or 18.x) but at the same time I haven't had it recur in our 18.x lab so...
-Michael
> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of
> Nikolas Geyer
> Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2019 6:27 PM
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Suggestions for Edge/Peering Router..
>
> I have to play devils advocate around “Right this inconsistency between
> configured and operational state in my opinion is THE biggest problem of XR”
>
> Have had this problem occur multiple times in Junos, as recently as Junos 17,
> where what was being advertised did not reflect configured policy. Worse
> still, the only recovery was complete deletion of the policy (and any peers
> using it) then re-adding it.
>
> So it’s definitely not a XR only problem.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 19, 2019, at 8:11 AM, "adamv0...@netconsultings.com"
> <adamv0...@netconsultings.com> wrote:
>
> >> From: Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi>
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2019 12:33 PM
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 14:22, <adamv0...@netconsultings.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Just a few examples when you change export policy it resets the peer
> >>> or the cockup with RR clearing all sessions or the fact BGP is part of
> >>> very complex RDP monolith -to me that's not really "carrier grade"
> >>> implementation
> >>
> >> This happens when export policy breaks update-group. It may sometimes
> be
> >> difficult for operator to understand if it will do that or not, so it's
> >> fair
> concern.
> >> Perhaps system should not clear, but tell manual clear is needed for policy
> >> change to take effect.
> >>
> > Ideally I'd like to see equivalent of Cisco's dynamic update peer-groups in
> Junos.
> >
> >> If monolith is good or bad, I'm not sure. If you thread you have high
> >> performance with some risk. If you have process separation you have IPC
> >> problem, and you have low performance and many will solve this by
> >> duplicating state. Junos is moving towards multi process model with Junos
> >> Evolved, if this will be positive or negative direction remains to be seen.
> >>
> > I like where XR and Junos Evolved is heading,
> > In future I'd like to have the option to install only stuff I need on a
> > particular
> type of node/deployment and not worry about the rest all the way to being
> able to mix and match protocols of different vendors.
> > Although cRPD is also interesting development pathway, but again cBGP
> would be even better :)
> >
> >> Operationally speaking, BGP in JunOS for us works great, on IOS-XR right
> now
> >> we have sessions where policy isn't what is configured and there is no
> way to
> >> verify which one, and we've propagated leaks because acting
> configuration
> >> isn't the one we've configured. We've not had similar problems in JunOS.
> This
> >> is anecdote, not data.
> >>
> > Right this inconsistency between configured and operational state in my
> opinion is THE biggest problem of XR, I'm afraid it has to be something
> fundamental since they haven't been able to consistently address these
> inconsistencies across the board for years now (or ASR9k HW? Not sure if
> these types of issues can be experienced on other platforms).
> > Though usually it's CP state does not trickle down to DP
> correctly/completely where what you described seems to be CP only.
> >
> > adam
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
