Well.... I don't have a active support contract, looks like this would become exactly another forgotten case...
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi> wrote: > On (2014-02-24 07:53 -0800), Yucong Sun wrote: > > > J-series / SRX series support system { internet-options { tcp-mss } } > even > > in packet mode, I would hope EX can do the same thing. > > This is not for transit, but for local TCP connections. For transit you > need > flow in SRX. > nope: at least for J-series, it will modify all packets passing through the device: check this http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos12.1/topics/example/session-tcp-maximum-segment-size-for-srx-series-setting-cli.html espeically the text in the box. It is obviously clunky, but without I'm stuck with a linux gateway with a iptables rule. > > I feel lack of formal+easy process for ERs is really missed opportunity by > vendors (not just JNPR, all of them). There isn't even any webtool, it's > usually just email to your account team then something may or may not > happen > and you have 0 visibility on it. > Why would you not want to make this very easy, maybe some community driven > page where ERs can be up/down voted. You're not losing anything, just > gaining > data you may or may not use. > > Then you keep hearing the classic 'no one has ever requested this before', > because data was lost. > > -- > ++ytti > _______________________________________________ > 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