North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Cisco uRPF failures
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Jo Rhett <[email protected]> wrote: > That's the surprising thing -- no scenario. Very basic configuration. > Enabling uRPF and then hitting it with a few gig of non-routable packets > consistently caused the sup module to stop talking on the console, and What do you mean by 'non routable?' What was the src/dst makeup of the test traffic? > We also discovered problems related to uRPF and load balanced links, but > those were difficult to reproduce in the lab and we couldn't affect their > peering, so we had to disable uRPF and ignore so I don't have much details. What version of code? Also, port-channel/lag or ECMP? > quickly, but that turns out not to be the case. To this day I've never I've never seen the issues you speak of, so it could be code/platform/config specific. Also, what sup were you testing? > found a network operator using uRPF on Cisco gear. > (note: network operator. it's probably fine for several-hundred-meg > enterprise sites) Forgive me, but what does bits/sec have to do with anything? -Tk
|