So a few weeks ago me and a few of us discovered that tracerouting from one IP on our static subnets to another has suddenly started bouncing off the Verizon gateway routers after their maintenance upgrade they rolled out around the same time. After some testing and ticket escalations with support, I finally managed to get a ticket to Verizon's IPNOC. They investigated the issue and here is what they found:
quote:Ok, so the explanation I got on this probably won't come as good news, but it will give us both an understanding of cause. We recently upgraded the gateway router from a Juniper E320 to an MX960. The profile for static IP on this treats every address on static like it's own /32 without the network or broadcast address. This is what's causing the addresses to arp up to the MX960 and why this change appeared so suddenly. Apparently this configuration wasn't supported on the E320 and was done to avoid the rare scenarios we've run in to where two static IP accounts on the same /24 were unable to communicate with one another.
The bad news part of this is IPNOC advised there is no way to change this, it's a global policy on all MX960s that are being deployed in the FiOS footprint. The advice passed down was to either put everything behind a NAT so all the local traffic stays local or to, ironically, consider Enterprise class service to get classical routing.
I know this wasn't the answer we wanted, but we now have one. On the bright side, the MX960 is a beast of a router and we shouldn't have any capacity issues for years to come.
- (VZ rep name with held, he did all he could to help and I greatly appreciate it)
I appreciate supports help in this but this is a pretty crappy view on customer support. This means there is almost no point in having anything more than 1 static IP if you want your network to behave properly. Verizon seems to be intent on leaving business accounts broken. GG Verizon. Maybe Frontier will be a better option...
↧