January 2018 - mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Please Welcome Coloplast to MICE!

by Jason Hanke

Name: Coloplast Port: ge-0/0/19 (Copper Main) ASN: 25111 IPv4: 206.108.255.91/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:6217::1/64 Peering Contact: plmgaw(a)coloplast.com Route Server: Yes BFD: NO Please update your peeringdb information as soon as you have the chance. Thanks! -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Jan. 16, 2018

Re: MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Doug McIntyre

It is set for missing 3 BFD updates will drop it, but I believe an error condition like "invalid flags (248)" is what caused the issue. I don't see any flags in RFC5880, I suspect source code reading would be next to see what BIRD thought of flags in BFD that aren't mentioned in the RFC. On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:07:17PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Thanks. This is why BFD can be so frustrating. So just one bad packet and the BFD session was torn down? Or three in a row? > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre >Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 3:08 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE route reflect hiccup last night? > >On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:25:44PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >>Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? > >No, but your BFD session received.. > >2018-01-09 03:41:40 <RMT> bfd1: Bad packet from 206.108.255.67 - invalid flags (248) > >That's all I've got related to it in the logs. > >-- >Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> > ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades > -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Jan. 10, 2018

Re: MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Frank Bulk

Thanks. This is why BFD can be so frustrating. So just one bad packet and the BFD session was torn down? Or three in a row? Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 3:08 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE route reflect hiccup last night? On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:25:44PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? No, but your BFD session received.. 2018-01-09 03:41:40 <RMT> bfd1: Bad packet from 206.108.255.67 - invalid flags (248) That's all I've got related to it in the logs. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Jan. 9, 2018

Re: MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Doug McIntyre

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:25:44PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? No, but your BFD session received.. 2018-01-09 03:41:40 <RMT> bfd1: Bad packet from 206.108.255.67 - invalid flags (248) That's all I've got related to it in the logs. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Jan. 9, 2018

MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Frank Bulk

Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session DOWN for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Reason:Detection Time Expired Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session UP for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 DOWN (Rcv Notification:CEASE Message) Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session DOWN for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Reason:Administratively Down Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session DOWN for 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 on eth 2/2 Reason:Detection Time Expired Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 DOWN (Rcv Notification:CEASE Message) Jan 9 03:42:36 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Jan 9 03:42:36 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session UP for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Jan 9 03:42:41 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Frank

Jan. 9, 2018

MICE Looking Glass router

by David Farmer

The MICE Looking Glass router doesn't seem to be supporting 4-byte ASNs. Could someone upgrade the code please. Thanks. -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================

Jan. 5, 2018

Re: Passive BFD support on Route-Server #1

by Frank Bulk

Great, thanks! -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 11:13 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Passive BFD support on Route-Server #1 On 12/29/2017 09:38 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Can the documentation at http://www.micemn.net/participants.html reflect that the RR's are now using BFD? Good idea. Done. > And maybe it can be noted on PeeringDB, too. I don't know who has the PeeringDB login. Jay? -- Richard

Jan. 1, 2018