One thing to add, if you don't have the tunnel-pic, you need to configure some sort of VE interface, in addition to use "no-tunnel-services" statement.
-Simon On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Marlon Duksa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A-ha. Thanks. > I needed an additional router in my setup, so I was using this older M20. > Obviously this won't work. If I segment my M320 into two logical routers, > then one of those two logical routers on M320 would replace the M20 and I > should be able to proceed with this VPLS setup, correct? > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 1:53 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Yes, no tp hardware in the chassis, this is why I'm using no-tunnel >> > -services cmd. >> > >> > Is there any workaround? Or at least the documentation mentioning that >> VPLS >> > PE is not supported on certain FPCs... >> >> Documented for instance at >> >> >> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos91/swconfig-vpns/configuring-vpls-without-a-tunnel-services-pic.html#id-11543506 >> >> "When you configure VPLS without a Tunnel Services PIC by including >> the no-tunnel-services statement, the following limitations apply: >> An Enhanced FPC is required." >> >> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp