Awesome. Thanks everyone. :-)
On Thursday, December 19, 2013, abdullahbaheer wrote:
> Also Jseries is end of sale and will be end of support soon after, so an
> SRX would be a better option for a new deployment.
> Thanks
> Abdullah Baheer
>
>
> Sent from Samsung Mobile
>
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Phil Mayers <p.may...@imperial.ac.uk <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'p.may...@imperial.ac.uk');>>
> Date: 19/12/2013 6:09 PM (GMT+03:00)
> To: Tom Storey <t...@snnap.net <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 't...@snnap.net');>>
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net');>
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J series packet mode
>
>
> On 19/12/13 15:06, Tom Storey wrote:
> > On 19 December 2013 14:39, Phil Mayers
> > <p.may...@imperial.ac.uk<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> > 'p.may...@imperial.ac.uk');>>
> wrote:
> >
> >>> performance hit? It looks like you can configure 3 address families
> >>> for packet mode (iso, inet6, mpls) but not inet4. But, from what Im
> >>> reading, enabling MPLS packet mode forces the whole box in to packet
> >>> mode, including inet4.
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >
> > Just want to clarify, are you saying there is a performance hit? Or
> > just that enabling MPLS packet mode forces the entire box in to packet
> > mode?
>
> The latter.
>
> We've not seen any unexpected performance issues from being in packet mode.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <javascript:_e({},
> 'cvml', '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
