Description

ACX7K routers does not support filter-specific policers with different counter-names in the terms.

Symptoms

ACX7K routers does not support filter-specific policers with different counter-names in the terms.

 

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_SSH from source-prefix-list V4_MGMT_INT_AE_PFX

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_SSH from protocol tcp

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_SSH from port ssh

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_SSH then policer MGMT_25MBPS

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_SSH then count ACCEPT_SSH

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_SSH then accept

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from destination-prefix-list V4_MGMT_INT_FXP0_PFX

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from destination-prefix-list V4_MGMT_INT_AE_PFX

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from destination-prefix-list V4_LO0_0_PFX

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from destination-prefix-list V4_THS_AGGREGATE_LO_PFX

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from protocol tcp

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from source-port ssh

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB from tcp-established

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB then policer MGMT_25MBPS

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB then count ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB

set firewall family inet filter PROTECT_RE term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB then accept

 

 

//Policer

set firewall policer MGMT_25MBPS filter-specific

set firewall policer MGMT_25MBPS if-exceeding bandwidth-limit 25m

set firewall policer MGMT_25MBPS if-exceeding burst-size-limit 128k

set firewall policer MGMT_25MBPS then discard

 

The above FW terms uses same policer that is filter specific and configured with different counters.

The FW filter programming will be failed in the PFE. The following errors will be seen in the device.

 

Oct 4 15:42:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] Dfw: Term ACCEPT_SSH and ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB has same filter-specific policer: MGMT_25MBPS but different counters or no counters. For per filter-spec policer, one unique counter across terms to be configured or no counters.

Oct 4 15:42:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwPfeFilter", msg = " func = validateTermActions, Term = ACCEPT_SSH, Term = ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB, same filter-specific policer = MGMT_25MBPS, but different counters = or no counters, For per filter-spec policer, one unique counter = across terms to be configured or no counters"

Oct 4 15:42:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwPfeFilter", msg = " func = updateComplete, updateFilter/updateComplete in validateTermActions = failed, filtIdx = 2100, filtername = PROTECT_RE"

Oct 4 15:42:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] Dfw: modifyFilter:updateComplete failed PROTECT_RE

Oct 4 15:42:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] Dfw: Filter Modify failed for filter PROTECT_RE

Oct 4 15:42:57 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwHandler", msg = " func = preUnInstallRules, Failed to get bind-info for bindContext = 157"

Oct 4 15:42:57 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwHandler", msg = " func = unInstallDfwRules, preUnInstallRules = failed, bindContext = 157"

 

ct 4 15:43:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 mgd[14528]: UI_COMMIT_PROGRESS: Commit operation in progress: signaling 'Layer 2 Control Protocol process', pid 10820, signal 1, status 0 with notification errors enabled

Oct 4 15:43:22 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwHandler", msg = " brcm_add_action_counter_policer = Stat-id and policer-id are not equal for StatAndPolicer, Stat-id = 161, policer-id = 160"

Oct 4 15:43:22 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] BrcmPlusPfe: Dfw: fp action add Counter failed , ret = Internal error

Oct 4 15:43:22 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] BrcmPlusPfe: hwInstallDfwRule failed., ret = Internal error

Oct 4 15:43:22 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] Dfw: Failed to install rules for term ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB in hardware

Oct 4 15:43:22 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwFilterBind", msg = " func = installTerm, Install rules in hardware = failed, term = ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB"

Oct 4 15:43:22 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwFilterBind", msg = " func = updateHw, Failed to install Term = ACCEPT_TCP_SSH_ESTAB"

Oct 4 15:43:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwFilterBind", msg = " func = install, Failed to install in hw for filter = PROTECT_RE"

Oct 4 15:43:23 jtac-acx7024-r2003 evo-pfemand[9924]: [t:9924] [Error] compName = "DFW", tpName = "DfwHandler", msg = " processBind = Failed to install filter bind"

 

 

Solution

This config is unsupported in ACX7k routers.

 

Modification History

2024-10-04 : Article Created