Forum Discussion
netKIZ_66576
Nimbostratus
Feb 16, 2009Big-IP inline with CSS - ARP Problem
Hi folks,
New to Big-IP. If I'm posting to the wrong forum please redirect me. Thanks in advance!
Problem: new Big-IP LTM 9.4.5 implementation, sits inline with Cisco CSS. Both are on the same vlans.
For some reason, packets destined for a configured Virtual Server (VIP) on the CSS began redirecting to the Big-IP. I cannot find any evidence that someone configured the virtual IP on the Big-IP device. Any ideas on what would have caused the Big-IP to ARP for that address? Or, can you advise on any troubleshooting steps to make sure this does not happen again?
The MAC reported in the CSS logs below belongs to VLAN 20 on the LTM.
Logs from LTM:
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm tmm[2178]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.1] port 48648 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm tmm[2178]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.2] port 35916 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm tmm[2178]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.2] port 35916 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm1 tmm1[1850]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.3] port 44145 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm1 tmm1[1850]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.3] port 44145 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm tmm[2178]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.4] port 55716 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm1 tmm1[1850]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.5] port 53833 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:57 tmm1 tmm1[1850]: 01200006:4: Packet rejected remote IP [pu.blic.ip.5] port 53833 local IP 10.20.10.164 port 80 proto TCP: Destination VIP disabled.
Feb 12 20:46:58 tmm tmm[2178]: 011e0001:4: Limiting unreachable response from 270 to 250 packets/sec
Feb 12 20:46:58 tmm1 tmm1[1850]: 011e0001:4: Limiting unreachable response from 263 to 250 packets/sec
Feb 12 20:46:59 tmm tmm[2178]: 011e0001:4: Limiting unreachable response from 281 to 250 packets/sec
Cisco CSS Log
=============
FEB 13 01:46:57 1/1 14134 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
FEB 13 01:47:05 1/1 14135 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
FEB 13 01:47:15 1/1 14136 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
FEB 13 01:47:25 1/1 14137 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
FEB 13 01:47:35 1/1 14138 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
FEB 13 01:47:45 1/1 14139 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
FEB 13 01:47:55 1/1 14140 IPV4-4: Duplicate IP address detected for vip: 10.20.10.164 00-01-d7-96-a7-02
========
Thank you!
- The_Bhattman
Nimbostratus
First, Big-IP LTM 9.4.5 is a feature release version you might want to downgrade to a stable release, something akeen to Cisco's Safe Harbor releases. Second, I believe your issue is related to SOL8009. - The_Bhattman
Nimbostratus
Sure no problemo
Recent Discussions
Related Content
DevCentral Quicklinks
* Getting Started on DevCentral
* Community Guidelines
* Community Terms of Use / EULA
* Community Ranking Explained
* Community Resources
* Contact the DevCentral Team
* Update MFA on account.f5.com
Discover DevCentral Connects