ok got it thank you Nick On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 3:43 PM Nick Olsen <n...@141networks.com> wrote:
> Nehul, > > He was running the 15 code train. I think 15.1R6.7. But don't take that as > fact. I just know it was 15 for sure. > ------------------------------ > *From:* Nehul Patel <nehul.pa...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, May 5, 2022 6:40 PM > *To:* Nick Olsen <n...@141networks.com> > *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject:* Re: Strange behavior on the Juniper MX240 > > Hi Nick, > > Thank you for the feedback on it. Would you please let me know which Juno > OS version he had installed on the MX Chassis that works with the extended > memory command of it? > > On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 12:50 PM Nick Olsen <n...@141networks.com> wrote: > > Friend of mine had this issue recently on an MX chassis running DPC's and > RE-2000's. > > The extend memory command others have mentioned worked for him. > > His instance drove us crazy for a bit. The device would learn a route, > show that it was installed (show routes) but traffic to said prefix would > bounce net unreachable. We even pushed a static just for S&G's and that > still didn't resolve it. It was a single prefix that a customer had > reported. > > Some things to consider, as others have mentioned. > > > 1. IPv6 routes share the same space. And use more per-route. You can > extend the life of this box (probably considerably) by dropping full tables > for IPv6. Perhaps taking just a default (Same goes for v4). > 2. It seems from your previous output that you're taking ~1 full v4 > table. And 2x v6 tables. Do you really need a full table if you're only > taking 1 v4 table? Consider switching to a default only? In my Colleagues > case, he was taking 2 full tables of v4 and v6 until he hit the same issue. > 3. While you're RE's could use a nice upgrade too. Your linecards are > actually the problem here. If you move to anything > DPC you get the trio > chipset with much more FIB space (2 Million routes I believe?). I'd > consider new RE's and new line cards for this box. Which might also mean > new switch fabric controllers.... Basically, we'd be talking a full > overhaul sans the power supplies and chassis. > 4. Consider taking a default + full routes. Then filtering > /24 (if > you even have anything < /24 learned now) (/48 on IPv6). > > Start with the memory command first and see where that gets you. But keep > a watchful eye out for this to happen again (as the DFZ grows). Eventually > your only option will be to filter routes and rely on a default or upgrade. > ------------------------------ > *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces+nick=141networks....@nanog.org> on behalf of > Nehul Patel <nehul.pa...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 4, 2022 3:56 PM > *To:* nanog@nanog.org <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject:* Strange behavior on the Juniper MX240 > > > Hi NANOG, > > We are seeing some strange behavior on our Juniper MX240 Chassis it is > randomly dropping the routes to the certain destination IP address getting > the following errors on the MX240 Chassis > > If Someone has seen these errors before please suggest how to resolve it > > > May 4 12:42:00 cr01 newsyslog[44735]: logfile turned over due to > size>1024K > May 4 12:42:01 /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 1 (PREFIX ADD) failed, err 5 > (Invalid) > May 4 12:42:01 /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 3 (PREFIX CHANGE) failed, err > 5 (Invalid) > May 4 12:42:01 last message repeated 4 times > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT: IPv6:0 - 2600:40fc:1011::/48 (add rt entry into > jtree failed) > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_entry_add_msg_proc,2028: > rt_halp_vectors->rt_create failed > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_entry_add_msg_proc,2092: proto ipv6,len > 48 prefix 2600:40fc:1011::/48 nh 1048576 > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_msg_handler,540: route process failed > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT: Failed prefix add IPv6 - 2001:67c:20fc::/48 (No > memory) on FE 0 > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT: IPv6:0 - 2001:67c:20fc::/48 (add rt entry into > jtree failed) > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_entry_add_msg_proc,2028: > rt_halp_vectors->rt_create failed > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_entry_add_msg_proc,2092: proto ipv6,len > 48 prefix 2001:67c:20fc::/48 nh 1048576 > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_msg_handler,540: route process failed > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT: Failed prefix add IPv6 - 2606:2800:e004::/48 > (No memory) on FE 0 > May 4 12:42:01 fpc0 RT: Failed prefix add IPv6 - 2a05:3181:ffff::/48 > (No memory) on FE 0 > May 4 12:42:01 /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 3 (PREFIX CHANGE) failed, err > 5 (Invalid) > May 4 12:42:01 /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 1 (PREFIX ADD) failed, err 5 > (Invalid) > May 4 12:42:01 /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 2 (PREFIX DELETE) failed, err > 5 (Invalid) > May 4 12:42:02 fpc0 RT: Failed prefix add IPv4 - 79.120.22/24 (No > memory) on FE 0 > May 4 12:42:02 fpc0 RT: IPv4:0 - 79.120.22/24 (add rt entry into jtree > failed) > May 4 12:42:02 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_entry_add_msg_proc,2028: > rt_halp_vectors->rt_create failed > May 4 12:42:02 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_entry_add_msg_proc,2092: proto ipv4,len > 24 prefix 79.120.22/24 nh 1048583 > May 4 12:42:02 /kernel: RT_PFE: RT msg op 1 (PREFIX ADD) failed, err 5 > (Invalid) > May 4 12:42:02 fpc0 RT-HAL,rt_msg_handler,540: route process failed > > May 4 09:33:17 fpc0 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree2-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:20 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:17 fpc0 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree2-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:1280 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc0 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree3-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:19 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc0 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree3-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:1216 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree0-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:16 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree0-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:1024 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree1-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:15 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree1-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:960 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:18 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree2-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:19 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree2-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:1216 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree3-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:17 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc1 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree3-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:1088 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc2 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree0-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:15 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc2 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree0-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:960 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc2 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree1-seg0 Type:free-pages Available:15 is less than LWM > limit:1638, rsmon_syslog_limit() > May 4 09:33:19 fpc2 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree > Instance:jtree1-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:960 is less than LWM > limit:104857, rsmon_syslog_limit() > > Any suggestions will be helpful > > > Please do let me know if you have any questions. > > > > > Regards and thanks, > Nehul > > >