Our BGP router (2.9.93) stopped routing. The BGP has an uplink to a Cisco BGP Router. We announce a /20 ip block
The message on the Cisco was (several 100-times)
BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: received from neighbor <ip-address-removed> 6/5 (cease) 0 b ytes 3w3d
Does anybody know the reason for this?
Kind regards,
Stephan
We have to wait for Mikrotik to correct such issues. I hope they will do it.:)
More and more people using MT for BGP!!!
Why MT people not give us final working routing ?
Quagga version used in MT is old. Commands is not enough,
with different commands we need different examples
If i am wrong - correct me! Quagga syntax is like cisco.
Mikrotik using quagga with their own syntax ...good...
what we get from quagga features ?
"Routing the world" ? Where ? To 127.0.0.1 ?
Why MT people not give us final working routing ?
Quagga version used in MT is old. Commands is not enough,
with different commands we need different examples
If i am wrong - correct me! Quagga syntax is like cisco.
Mikrotik using quagga with their own syntax ...good...
what we get from quagga features ?
"Routing the world" ? Where ? To 127.0.0.1 ?
Re: :)
I agree if nothing is done soon we will be moving out of MT instead of ordering another 6 licencesMore and more people using MT for BGP!!!
Why MT people not give us final working routing ?
"Routing the world" ? Where ? To 127.0.0.1 ?
Re: :)
where? wherever you tell it to. But seroisly, I don't want to repeat myself, but where is your email to support? did you make a supout.rif file with 2.9.25 and routing-test, and did you send it with a problem description to support?"Routing the world" ? Where ? To 127.0.0.1 ?
we have some customers with giant BGP networks who say that 2.9.25 BGP works fast and perfect.
We want to help you, but we need those reports.
I sent a support request [Ticket#2006060516000369] with 2.9.24 crashing. They replied back --UPGRADE to 2.9.25. We upgraded. The same thing happened to 2.9.25 today evening EST , we had screaming customers so we cant wait for a supout anymore . Its an intermittent problem i dont know when it will wake me up at night, midnight or morning.
I am running 2 peers with 180k routes from each. I have been forced to use routing instead of routing-test because changeip has experienced problems with it and we cant loose customers , software built should work . I wish VRRP was proper atleast it would failover (which also cannot be trusted now).
I am running 2 peers with 180k routes from each. I have been forced to use routing instead of routing-test because changeip has experienced problems with it and we cant loose customers , software built should work . I wish VRRP was proper atleast it would failover (which also cannot be trusted now).
:)))
if you have BGP with MT and tryin` two packages you know about ...
Some features of BGP protocol, software that deals with BGP, not "iron" cisco...just software, like quagga and zebra .
In MT case - this is quagga. And if you see routing and routing-test
features, then you see "cisco links" from "documentation" about 2.9 MT...
If you search on forum and archive to see how many posts with troubles ...if you see post that say "routing-test is ok... use it" ...if you see features in old routing package ...
And you understand ..may be... same sh1t - different day..
We wait for final solution about this problems ... quagga is a small software, but its rewiten and "killed" by MT devs..
Too many bugs and problems ...
Some features of BGP protocol, software that deals with BGP, not "iron" cisco...just software, like quagga and zebra .
In MT case - this is quagga. And if you see routing and routing-test
features, then you see "cisco links" from "documentation" about 2.9 MT...
If you search on forum and archive to see how many posts with troubles ...if you see post that say "routing-test is ok... use it" ...if you see features in old routing package ...
And you understand ..may be... same sh1t - different day..
We wait for final solution about this problems ... quagga is a small software, but its rewiten and "killed" by MT devs..
Too many bugs and problems ...
BGP in routing-test package is written from the ground up.
Although several problems exist with routing-test package, we have many customers that are using BGP in production environments without any issues. If you happen to have a problem, then send support output file to support@mikrotik.com to enable us to help you. the next version will usually contain a fix. If you are experiencing the same problem with the newest version, than send new support output file, not again the old one.
Regarding the 2.9.25 version, BGP was heavily optimized for speed in that version (now full table syncs in less than 15 seconds compared to 10+ minutes in previous versions).
Although several problems exist with routing-test package, we have many customers that are using BGP in production environments without any issues. If you happen to have a problem, then send support output file to support@mikrotik.com to enable us to help you. the next version will usually contain a fix. If you are experiencing the same problem with the newest version, than send new support output file, not again the old one.
Regarding the 2.9.25 version, BGP was heavily optimized for speed in that version (now full table syncs in less than 15 seconds compared to 10+ minutes in previous versions).
hmm
apologize , may be i`m wrong with "quagga or zebra"
finaly i stop to write here and test .25 BGP ...and will see ..
thanks to normis and eugene for activity here.
may be nikhill need to send .rif file, i don`t need ...just wait for complete
features.
still wait for solution about advertise and filtering.
some primers about them
finaly i stop to write here and test .25 BGP ...and will see ..
thanks to normis and eugene for activity here.
may be nikhill need to send .rif file, i don`t need ...just wait for complete
features.
still wait for solution about advertise and filtering.
some primers about them
Re: hmm
I think that without the real testing from the client's end and only with the empty shouting this waiting will be much, much longer.apologize , may be i`m wrong with "quagga or zebra"
finaly i stop to write here and test .25 BGP ...and will see ..
thanks to normis and eugene for activity here.
may be nikhill need to send .rif file, i don`t need ...just wait for complete
features.
still wait for solution about advertise and filtering.
some primers about them
Re: hmm
I will test 2.9.25 tomorrow morning but for now I see some things still missing in bgp:[
I think that without the real testing from the client's end and only with the empty shouting this waiting will be much, much longer.
- network declaration, like "network W.X.Y.Z"
- completely reset of bgp session (I don't know what refresh exactly is)
- possibility to check what prefixes are announced (sh ip bg nei W.X.Y.Z ad), that can be done: /routing bgp peer NUMBER advertised print - or similar
- "clear ip bg" "soft in" and "soft out" - IN/OUT parameters for refresh should be enough
Are there any others that would like to see above?
Gregor
I have to say 2.9.25 bgp is 95% there ... its very fast compared to previous versions, deals with route updates well, but we are having major problems with 100% cpu. We've sent supouts and some graphs showing this.
We have setup 2 quagga boxes, and 2 mikrotiks. One peers with each quagga box, and then the 2 routeros's peer with each other. After disabling a peering session it seems the router can't flush 180,000 routes or something and it ends up 100% cpu forever. Supouts were sent.
Sam
We have setup 2 quagga boxes, and 2 mikrotiks. One peers with each quagga box, and then the 2 routeros's peer with each other. After disabling a peering session it seems the router can't flush 180,000 routes or something and it ends up 100% cpu forever. Supouts were sent.
Sam
Hey did you notice that bgp now crashes very often if you have >1 bgp peers?
Serriously now can you check it out?
Also once again thank you for not telling us about the new features.
Network, Aggregate and Advertisements commands. (What is the 3rd one actually do? Is it something similar to a route-map policy?
Ohh also forgot to tell you about the wireless extensions (pre and post 2.9.25) Which again we don't know what they are.
Ok I can understand that you cannot write tutorials and help files.. but please can you just mention a brief description. Even in the changelog whould be ok.
Kind Regards,
-Yiannis
Serriously now can you check it out?
Also once again thank you for not telling us about the new features.
Network, Aggregate and Advertisements commands. (What is the 3rd one actually do? Is it something similar to a route-map policy?
Ohh also forgot to tell you about the wireless extensions (pre and post 2.9.25) Which again we don't know what they are.
Ok I can understand that you cannot write tutorials and help files.. but please can you just mention a brief description. Even in the changelog whould be ok.
Kind Regards,
-Yiannis
Ooo... I have just seen it. Advertisement seems to be working (thanks!):Also once again thank you for not telling us about the new features.
Network, Aggregate and Advertisements commands. (What is the 3rd one actually do? Is it something similar to a route-map policy?
[admin@MikroTik] > /routing bgp advertisements print 89.187.224.1
# DST-ADDRESS NEXTHOP AS-PATH ORIGIN LOCAL-PREF
0 89.187.232.0/23 89.187.224.10 incomplete 100
1 195.238.247.0/24 89.187.224.10 incomplete 100
But adding prefixed to /routing bgp network doesn't couse announcing it - why?
Gregor
I can confirm what ysam said about bgp crashes.
The log bellow show this.
This screenshot is from a routerboard532 wich have 2 bgp peers.
One running Quagga (10.17.119.130) and the other running 2.9.24 routing-test (10.17.119.129).
In routerboard i have 2.9.25 routing-test.
The problem exists even with 2.9.25 routing-test in both sides and it came up with 2.9.25.
We have played with hold timer but we end up to nothing.
I bellieve you guys must focus a litle bit more on the bgp (on routing-test).
If we were speaking for some delicate new feature on a desktop pc it would have no matter.
But seeing this from the scope of a router in a fairly large network it's a major problem to having THE routing protocol to behave like this.
Normal routing package is not an option for some of us. It's like you go and buy a shiny mercedes and put a fiat uno engine on it
Another supout is on it's way.
The log bellow show this.
This screenshot is from a routerboard532 wich have 2 bgp peers.
One running Quagga (10.17.119.130) and the other running 2.9.24 routing-test (10.17.119.129).
In routerboard i have 2.9.25 routing-test.
The problem exists even with 2.9.25 routing-test in both sides and it came up with 2.9.25.
We have played with hold timer but we end up to nothing.
I bellieve you guys must focus a litle bit more on the bgp (on routing-test).
If we were speaking for some delicate new feature on a desktop pc it would have no matter.
But seeing this from the scope of a router in a fairly large network it's a major problem to having THE routing protocol to behave like this.
Normal routing package is not an option for some of us. It's like you go and buy a shiny mercedes and put a fiat uno engine on it
Another supout is on it's way.
I got same bgp error log!!I can confirm what ysam said about bgp crashes.
The log bellow show this.
This screenshot is from a routerboard532 wich have 2 bgp peers.
One running Quagga (10.17.119.130) and the other running 2.9.24 routing-test (10.17.119.129).
In routerboard i have 2.9.25 routing-test.
The problem exists even with 2.9.25 routing-test in both sides and it came up with 2.9.25.
We have played with hold timer but we end up to nothing.
I bellieve you guys must focus a litle bit more on the bgp (on routing-test).
If we were speaking for some delicate new feature on a desktop pc it would have no matter.
But seeing this from the scope of a router in a fairly large network it's a major problem to having THE routing protocol to behave like this.
Normal routing package is not an option for some of us. It's like you go and buy a shiny mercedes and put a fiat uno engine on it :)
Another supout is on it's way.
Thank god!! :P
MT has sent me an update routing-test to see if cpu problem is fixed. So far everything seems to have settled down. The speed to sync peers has slowed down a bit but at least it doesnt spin out of control with 100% cpu forever. i've been testing it for hours with quagga and it seems to be much better now. 180,000+ routes on 1 peering session, 60,000 routes on another, and using ibgp to peer those together... and its not killing itself anymore.
Finally we're making some progress!
Like Normis said, you need to send supouts and explain the problem (in good detail) otherwise they don't know what's wrong. I doubt they have 2 peering sessions with full route tables to their providers so they try to make this package work blindly. It's hard to reproduce a real environment for testing packages before you roll out upgrades but its very necessary. I congratulate them on the bug fixes in .25-.26 and look forward to a stable package here shortly.
Sam
Finally we're making some progress!
Like Normis said, you need to send supouts and explain the problem (in good detail) otherwise they don't know what's wrong. I doubt they have 2 peering sessions with full route tables to their providers so they try to make this package work blindly. It's hard to reproduce a real environment for testing packages before you roll out upgrades but its very necessary. I congratulate them on the bug fixes in .25-.26 and look forward to a stable package here shortly.
Sam
Good news! So we would like to read some docs about new commands in 2.9.25 routing-test. I still don't know how to use /routing bgp network.MT has sent me an update routing-test to see if cpu problem is fixed. So far everything seems to have settled down. The speed to sync peers has slowed down a bit but at least it doesnt spin out of control with 100% cpu forever. i've been testing it for hours with quagga and it seems to be much better now.
MT - can you write here just few words describing new commands?
Gregor
Gregor,
network is first simple way to advertise your own networks and if you add them with command - this is your networks from your router ...
other ways is with "connected and static" but is not useful for small networks with mikrotik filters that i can`t successfuly run for some reasons.
That point with network=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx i`ve wait from MT people. Thanks.
network is first simple way to advertise your own networks and if you add them with command - this is your networks from your router ...
other ways is with "connected and static" but is not useful for small networks with mikrotik filters that i can`t successfuly run for some reasons.
That point with network=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx i`ve wait from MT people. Thanks.
I sent a supout.rif myself but with regular routing package , Intel nics 82546GB stops sending any packets i cannot ping the ips . I have tried 2 different machiens.
I am also advertising using network option .
Would like to know more.
I am also advertising using network option .
Would like to know more.
Gregor,
network is first simple way to advertise your own networks and if you add them with command - this is your networks from your router ...
other ways is with "connected and static" but is not useful for small networks with mikrotik filters that i can`t successfuly run for some reasons.
That point with network=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx i`ve wait from MT people. Thanks.
I have already written that network doesn't work for me. My Mikrotik doesn't announce prefixes entered in network statement.network is first simple way to advertise your own networks and if you add them with command - this is your networks from your router ...
other ways is with "connected and static" but is not useful for small networks with mikrotik filters that i can`t successfuly run for some reasons.
That point with network=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx i`ve wait from MT people. Thanks.
Gregor
Gregor i have installed last version on routing-test-2.9.25.npk
(
And now i think to joy with prepends and hold timer to make router
more flexible with dynamic routes.
(i have 2x over 180 000 routes and 2x over 1800 routes in 4 vlans)
CPU - 3GHz , 4 Intel gigabit PCIx network adapters,
1 G RAM (very strange ...MT said this is 866 Mbyte RAM ),
CPU load is about 4-12 ....and for now everythings good.
Advertise with command
network=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx is ok.
Thanks to MT devs - finaly works again.
(
), and for last 12 hours BGP is still up and running without deaviations.new routing test, which supposedly fixes some BGP issues:
http://www.mikrotik.com/download/routin ... 25_new.zip
And now i think to joy with prepends and hold timer to make router
more flexible with dynamic routes.
(i have 2x over 180 000 routes and 2x over 1800 routes in 4 vlans)
CPU - 3GHz , 4 Intel gigabit PCIx network adapters,
1 G RAM (very strange ...MT said this is 866 Mbyte RAM ),
CPU load is about 4-12 ....and for now everythings good.
Advertise with command
network=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx is ok.
Thanks to MT devs - finaly works again.
17:36:32 system,info router rebooted
17:36:40 system,error,critical login failure for user admin via local
17:36:44 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Operation now in progress
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=x.x.x.x
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:36:44 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Bad file descriptor
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=y.y.y.y
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:36:45 system,info,account user admin logged in via local
17:37:05 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Operation now in progress
17:37:05 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=x.x.x.x
17:37:05 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:37:07 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Bad file descriptor
17:37:07 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=y.y.y.y
17:37:07 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:37:17 system,info,account user admin logged in from 10.100.10.5 via winbox
17:37:28 route,bgp,info TCP connection established
17:37:28 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=y.y.y.y
17:37:28 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:36:40 system,error,critical login failure for user admin via local
17:36:44 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Operation now in progress
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=x.x.x.x
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:36:44 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Bad file descriptor
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=y.y.y.y
17:36:44 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:36:45 system,info,account user admin logged in via local
17:37:05 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Operation now in progress
17:37:05 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=x.x.x.x
17:37:05 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:37:07 route,bgp,info Failed to open TCP connection: Bad file descriptor
17:37:07 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=y.y.y.y
17:37:07 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
17:37:17 system,info,account user admin logged in from 10.100.10.5 via winbox
17:37:28 route,bgp,info TCP connection established
17:37:28 route,bgp,info RemoteAddr=y.y.y.y
17:37:28 route,bgp,info RemotePort=179
I don't think we are going to make anything stable with mikrotik. Their new routig-test has been stable for two days and crashed. Now all my bgp sessions still establish and close.Gregor i have installed last version on routing-test-2.9.25.npk and for last 12 hours BGP is still up and running without deaviations.
And now i think to joy with prepends and hold timer to make router
more flexible with dynamic routes.
I have bought service support but they even don't answer my emails.
Mikrotik WOULD be some nice piece of software. But it is not due to its instability. Why have they made the whole routeros, when it is not usable?
Gregor
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: MarkusT and 149 guests