On May 21, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
It makes the thread very hard to follow.
Why not?
Please don't top-post!
From: Cord MacLeod <cordmacl...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 11:21:46 -0700
Umm, being that this post was about the ex4200... the platform was
the
ex4200.
After I submitted a few PRs on 9.3R2 for the EX platform, the message
was these would be fixed in 9.3R3 and would be exceptionally stable.
On May 21, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
From: Cord MacLeod <cordmacl...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 10:37:30 -0700
Sender: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
Can you elaborate on 'the whole routing seems to fail'? I was
actually told by JTAC to upgrade to 9.3R3 as soon as it came out as
it
would be exceptionally stable code.
Umm. On which platform?
On non-EX platforms, 9.3 looks pretty good, although there were
show-stoppers for us in 93r2, r3 seems to have fixed them.
This message was about the EX software and it is a VERY different
beast.
We are running 9.3r2 on EX systems. The most serious issue (to us)
won't
be fixed in r3. :-( It forces us to add static ARP table entries in
the
up-stream routers. Without those, the ARP responses stop after a while
and things just stop. At least the work-around is not too bad.
Indeed that would be a major issue. Strange I've never encountered
it. I'm running an ex4200-48T virtual chassis for my top of rack
switches, ex4200-24-T virtual chassis for the agg layer and M7's up
top. They've been running stable for around 5 months now. Although
I'm only using the ex4200-24T in L3 mode.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
