cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
6338
Views
0
Helpful
3
Replies

EIGRP MTU Size Causing Neighbor Flap - Pls help!

joshua izzi
Level 1
Level 1

I've been reading the post here which is quite good but, I have some outstanding questions I hope someone can help me with?

 

https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/thread/43100#233367

 

Essentially, we have a DCI which is an evpl link - layer 2. The evpl connection is terminated with a Cisco 3925 at each location (once it comes out of the provider's Ciena box). It is a dot1g tagged trunk - L2 connection. We are running EIGRP between the two. Before setting up OTV, all link sizes were 1500 MTU...which obviously will not work with OTV....and it didnt!. OTV is running on 7Ks a few hops away from each 3925. So, I went on each and every link - (pain stakingly) and configured MTU size for 9216 - enabling jumboframes at the system level too where applicable. What do you know, OTV started working and i could ping to at least up to 2000 bytes with DF-bit set too! (I didn't try any higher).

 

Last night, our provider did some 'maintenance' without telling us - which brought the link down. The link was 'down' even after the maintenace was completed. After looking in the logs and seeing this, I suspected it had to do with MTU sizes after quickly googling around.

 

May 13 12:33:13.698: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is down: Interface PEER-TERMINATION received

May 13 12:33:13.976: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is up: new adjacency

May 13 12:33:24.266: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by izzi on vty0 (10.241.6.12)

May 13 12:34:00.286: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is down: Interface PEER-TERMINATION received

May 13 12:34:00.616: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is up: new adjacency

May 13 12:34:46.922: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is down: Interface PEER-TERMINATION received

May 13 12:34:47.280: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is up: new adjacency

May 13 12:35:37.364: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is down: holding time expired

May 13 12:37:29.725: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by izzi on vty0 (10.241.6.12)

May 13 12:37:47.430: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is up: new adjacency

May 13 12:39:01.508: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by izzi on vty0 (10.241.6.12)

May 13 12:39:11.943: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is down: Interface PEER-TERMINATION received

May 13 12:39:13.973: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 10: Neighbor 198.28.132.30 (GigabitEthernet0/0.2) is up: new adjacency

 

So, I reduced the MTU size back to 1500 and low and behold, adjacency stayed. Let me also say that there weren't any errors on the links too. So, I decided to try and increase the MTU back up to 9216 - OTV started working again and adjancey held - it didnt flap. I thought for a second and decided to bounce the link. Once i did this, EIGRP started flapping again with the same exact behavior. After calling the provider, they claim that their max MTU is only 1522 for our EVPL link. I don't see this being possible since I was able to ping DF-BIT set way above 1522. Maybe I'm missing something. We are going to coordinate with them to increase the MTU size on the link. But why/how did it work to begin with - especially since OTV doesn't support fragmenation....I understand that OTV adjacency can still form since ISIS only needs 14xx something...but I wasn't able to get certain protocals/services like esxi host management to work via OTV until i increased MTU size.

 

Also, after reading the above article it sounds like EIGRP will 'peer' or decide on MTU of it's update packets? If that's the case, maybe the bouncing of the link allowed EIGRP to negotiate it's packet sizes to above 1500 and that's why if I change the MTU size to above 1500 everything works fine - OTV/2000 byte bf-bit set ping, until I bounce the link? If this is the case, is there anyway to 'force' EIGRP to use 1500 for it's packets for its protocol traffic and allow everything else to use the MTU set on the link?

 

I would appreciate any help explaining this - hopefully you're not as confused as I was after reading it again!

3 Replies 3

Richard Lucht
Level 1
Level 1

Did you ever find the root cause and this solution for this?  We are experiencing the same issues with our 2 4500  Catalyst and a couple of routers on our inter routing VLAN that we use for only the 2 chassis and a couple of router.  MTU is already set at 1500 on the 2 chassis.

 

005326: Jan 19 11:30:02: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.21 (Vlan990) is down: Peer goodbye received
005327: Jan 19 11:30:05: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.1 (Vlan990) is up: new adjacency
005328: Jan 19 11:30:05: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.21 (Vlan990) is up: new adjacency
005329: Jan 19 11:30:07: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.12 (Vlan990) is down: holding time expired
005330: Jan 19 11:30:27: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.21 (Vlan990) is down: Peer goodbye received
005331: Jan 19 11:30:28: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.11 (Vlan990) is down: Peer goodbye received
005332: Jan 19 11:30:28: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.1 (Vlan990) is down: Peer goodbye received
005333: Jan 19 11:30:30: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.12 (Vlan990) is up: new adjacency
005334: Jan 19 11:30:30: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.11 (Vlan990) is up: new adjacency
005335: Jan 19 11:30:30: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.1 (Vlan990) is up: new adjacency
005336: Jan 19 11:30:32: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 65001: Neighbor 10.190.254.21 (Vlan990) is up: new adjacency

Hello,

Are you seeing routes being exchanged? I would try to run some more eigrp debugging to see at what point the adjacency goes down. I would also ensure your spanning tree is working properly and your route bridge is set correctly.

The issue I had was because EIGRP was trying to use the larger MTU size that I had set on the interface in its eigrp update packets during the intitial routing table exchange. Because the packets used the larger MTU and the provider EVPL connection wasn't set high enough (MTU), the packets were being dropped. When EIGRP cannot receive acks from sending updates, it assumes its neighbor is dead after a period of time - thus breaking adjacency.

We had the same issue in our Nexus 7k where the MTU size was set to 9200. The topology was two nexus core switches and two firewalls, one connected by Vlan 33 and other by vlan44. The engineer changed the MTU on the layer 3 SVI on the Nexus core and after 23 hours, eigrp neighborship started flapping. When MTU was rolled back, the EIGRP stabilized. 

 

The root cause was: 

The MTU was changed on the SVI of the VLANs and not on the physical interfaces going to the two firewalls and the trunk links between the two core switches carrying vlan 33 and 44. 

 

Why it took 23 hours to manifest the issue ?

There weren't enough EIGRP routing updates for the time period but after 23 hours of this change, there was a big EIGRP update ( which we could find in the routing table-age of the routes). The VLAN 33 and 44 SVI sent the update in a jumbo packet which is obviuosly dropped by the physical interfaces as they were still at 1500 bytes. As the update never reached the neighbor, the neighborship started to break and eigrp started flapping.

 

Next step: 

We will enable the jumbo mtu on all the physical interfaces in the transit to get this working.  

 

Review Cisco Networking for a $25 gift card