Did you write those firewall filters that you list? What was the error that you got?
You’ll have to assign lo0 into a security zone, that might be what’s missing. "security zones functional-zone management” must be in inet.0. You can do other zones in a VRF and do in-band management within them (though it’s slightly recommended against, due to potential of misconfiguration causing a security issue), but this should work. That’s what Clinton was saying. > On Jul 8, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Jason Lixfeld <jason-j...@lixfeld.ca> wrote: > > I’m not quite following. This won’t work: > > set interfaces lo0 unit 0 family inet address 10.219.60.54/32 > set interfaces lo0 unit 0 family inet filter input-list > V4-ACCEPT-COMMON-SERVICES > set interfaces lo0 unit 0 family inet filter input-list V4-ACCEPT-ESTABLISHED > set interfaces lo0 unit 0 family inet filter input-list V4-DISCARD-ALL > set routing-instances MANAGEMENT instance-type vrf > set routing-instances MANAGEMENT interface lo0.0 > set routing-instances MANAGEMENT route-distinguisher 21949:21949 > set routing-instances MANAGEMENT vrf-target target:21949:21949 > >> On Jul 7, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Clinton Work <clin...@scripty.com> wrote: >> >> I would still use lo0.0 as your always up in-band mgmt interface. >> JunOS doesn't support putting management into a routing-instance and I >> have been pushing Juniper for this. You can use inet.0 for management >> and additional logical routers for data traffic, but that is different >> than a Cisco management VRF. >> >> JunOS doesn't have an explicit control-plane interface and you attach >> your control-plane filter to lo0.0 instead. >> >> -- >> Clinton Work >> Airdrie, AB >> >> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Jason Lixfeld wrote: >>> Hey there, >>> >>> Coming from a Cisco background, I generally assign a loopback interface >>> as my in-band management channel. I stick that into my management VRF >>> and that’s that. Without knowing any better, my instinct would be to do >>> the same in JunOS, but it seems as though lo0 is the control plane >>> interface between user space and the re. That feels somewhat different >>> to me, because the Cisco equivalent is generally the control-plane >>> “interface”. >> >>> >>> So my question is what the best common practise is for an always-up, >>> in-band management channel on JunOS in an exclusively L3 environment >>> (i.e.: no vlan or irb interfaces used at all in the system) without >>> fully understanding whether that could also be lo0.0, or whether it >>> should be lo0.somethingelse, or whether it should be something else >>> entirely. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp