Mailing List Archive

Richard,
According with what I read I'd say the the next-hop is not reachable
(pingable).

Thanks
German

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

> Can someone explain what "Inactive reason: Unusable path" means precisely=
?
>
> The oh so helpful description on the website:
>
> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos55/swcmdref55/html/pr=
otocols-monitor-generic4.html
> Unusable path - =97Pat not usable.
>
> Just doesn't quite cut it. :)
>
> --
> Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ra=
s
> PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6=
)
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>

On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 04:56:35PM -0400, German Martinez wrote:
> Richard,
> According with what I read I'd say the the next-hop is not reachable
> (pingable).

Well, I once had a slew of routes with this inactive reason on an
otherwise perfectly normal transit feed from a Crisco where the next-hop
was fine (both normally and with next-hop peer-address), but I didn't get
around to asking about this before it went away, so lets stick with an
invalid nexthop as the reason for the moment.

I'm puzzled why I cannot manually set the next-hop on BGP routes being
imported with a policy-statement. When something simple is applied, like
"then next-hop x.x.x.x" where x.x.x.x is the perfectly reachable directly
connected next-hop, the route becomes hidden with "Unusable Path" and
"Unusable nexthop".

Next hop type: Unusable
State: <Hidden Ext>
Inactive reason: Unusable path

This is something you can do w/Cisco obviously, and it has been reported
to me that it can be done on Junos 5.0, but I have been unable to do it
with JunOS 5.2-5.4. And no it's not to point next-hop at peers, I have a
legitimate reason. :)

--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)

Is the bgp next-hop known via a "next-hop" that is not directly connected?
In earlier versions of JUNOS, you could not recurse more than once.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard A Steenbergen [mailto:ras@e-gerbil.net]
> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 6:14 PM
> To: German Martinez
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Unusable Path?
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 04:56:35PM -0400, German Martinez wrote:
> > Richard,
> > According with what I read I'd say the the next-hop is not
> reachable
> > (pingable).
>
> Well, I once had a slew of routes with this inactive reason on an
> otherwise perfectly normal transit feed from a Crisco where
> the next-hop was fine (both normally and with next-hop
> peer-address), but I didn't get around to asking about this
> before it went away, so lets stick with an
> invalid nexthop as the reason for the moment.
>
> I'm puzzled why I cannot manually set the next-hop on BGP
> routes being imported with a policy-statement. When something
> simple is applied, like "then next-hop x.x.x.x" where x.x.x.x
> is the perfectly reachable directly connected next-hop, the
> route becomes hidden with "Unusable Path" and "Unusable nexthop".
>
> Next hop type: Unusable
> State: <Hidden Ext>
> Inactive reason: Unusable path
>
> This is something you can do w/Cisco obviously, and it has
> been reported to me that it can be done on Junos 5.0, but I
> have been unable to do it with JunOS 5.2-5.4. And no it's not
> to point next-hop at peers, I have a legitimate reason. :)
>
> --
> Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>
> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
> PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7
> BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/junipe> r-nsp
>

On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 11:21:52PM -0400, Martin, Christian wrote:
> Is the bgp next-hop known via a "next-hop" that is not directly connected?
> In earlier versions of JUNOS, you could not recurse more than once.

It is indeed directly connected. You can even see it in a show pfe
next-hop. Am I to understand that other people actually have this working?

--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)