On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 03:12:29PM +0200, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp wrote: > On 10/25/23 10:57, Sebastian Wiesinger via juniper-nsp wrote: > > Yeah it depends. Our MX204 also needed licenses for subscriber > > managment. Some options would produce a license warning and some other > > stuff just failed silently which was worse. Also noone at Juniper > > seemed to know WHICH licenses we needed for our usecase. > > > > In the end our license list looked like this: > > > > subscriber-accounting > > subscriber-authentication > > subscriber-address-assignment > > subscriber-vlan > > subscriber-ip > > scale-subscriber > > scale-l2tp > > l2tp-inline-lns > > > > So yeah.. that wasn't a nice experience at all. > > Subscriber Management has always required real licenses on the MX since > it started shipping BNG code. > > You got 1,000 subscribers as standard, and then needed an enforceable > license after that.
This caused us heartburn for our Campus LAN when we upgraded as we had been using "forwarding-options helpers bootp" and were told that it was deprecated and we needed to move to "forwarding-options dhcp-relay" which is a BNG feature that requires a subscriber license--a ridiculous requirement for a Campus LAN. It turns out that "helpers bootp" still worked, and may still work today, but I'm no longer working in that environment so I'm not sure. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
