Hi
Tried exactly same. Note: it's ae18 and ae20 on EX side and reth4 on SRX side. Initially worked but when I took down ae18, i.e ae18 is disabled, now on ae20 I am getting: show interfaces ae20 Physical interface: ae20, Enabled, Physical link is Up Interface index: 533, SNMP ifIndex: 924 Link-level type: Ethernet, MTU: 1514, Speed: 2Gbps, BPDU Error: None, MAC-REWRITE Error: None, Loopback: Disabled, Source filtering: Disabled, Flow control: Disabled, Minimum links needed: 1, Minimum bandwidth needed: 0 on reth4 on SRX I am getting: show interfaces reth4 Physical interface: reth4, Enabled, Physical link is Down Interface index: 132, SNMP ifIndex: 696 Any idea why so? All physical ports are up (none is shut) and only thing which I shut is one of ae bundles. Also rather then disabling ae18 if I disabled associated physical ports behavior is just the same i.e reth4 goes down. Thanks for your time and help! On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote: > Putting the EXs in a VC and splitting your AEs across the 2x VC members > takes care of that. > > EXVC (ae1) >> Two Patches to SRX0 (reth1) > EXVC (ae2) >> Two Patches to SRX1 (reth1) > > ...where EXVC is a VC composed of EX0 and EX1, and ae1 and ae2 both have > one member interface from each VC member. > > In a failure of EX0 or EX1, your throughput on ae1 and ae2 halves as they > each lose a LAG member, but both SRX0 and SRX1 are still reachable. > > -- > Hugo > > > On Thu 2015-Apr-02 23:50:46 +0530, Anurag Bhatia <m...@anuragbhatia.com> > wrote: > > Hi >> >> >> >> Yes, >> >> >> Since SRX0 connected to EX0 and SRX1 connected to EX1 (only). Thus either >> pair - 0 will work or pair - 1 will work. I wish if criss crossing worked >> then failure of one EX would have still made both SRX available. >> >> >> In current worst case scenario - failure of EX0 and SRX1 can cause full >> outage. >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote: >> >> In: >>> >>> > EX0 (ae1) >> Two Patches to SRX0 (reth1) >>> >>>> > EX1 (ae2) >> Two Patches to SRX1 (reth1) >>>>> >>>>> >>>> with: >>> >>> > that if one EX goes down then I cannot make use of other corresponding >>> >>>> SRX. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Do you mean that e.g. if SRX0 is the chassis cluster primary and EX0 >>> goes >>> down, then you can't use SRX0, but you would like to be able to survive >>> EX0 >>> going down *without* failing over the SRX chassis cluster to SRX1? >>> >>> -- >>> Hugo >>> >>> >>> On Thu 2015-Apr-02 20:47:03 +0530, Anurag Bhatia <m...@anuragbhatia.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I thought cross chassis lag is supposed by the use of reth bundled at >>>> SRX >>>> end. I read this is basically the major difference in reth Vs ae bundle >>>> in >>>> SRX. >>>> >>>> >>>> Interesting factor here is that ae bundles can spread across multiple EX >>>> chassis in a virtual chassis environment but this cannot be the case >>>> with >>>> ae bundles in SRX. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Bill Blackford <bblackf...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> It's my understanding that a cross chassis LAG is not supported. If >>>> there >>>> >>>>> is a way, I'm not aware of it. I'm running the same set up as your >>>>> working >>>>> example in my locations and for now, this suits my requirements. >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> > On Apr 2, 2015, at 07:12, Anurag Bhatia <m...@anuragbhatia.com> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Hello everyone! >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > I have got two Juniper EX series switches (on virtual chassis) and >>>>> two >>>>> SRX >>>>> > devices on native clustering. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > I am trying to have a highly available redundancy between them with >>>>> atleast >>>>> > 2Gbps capacity all the time but kind of failing. I followed Juniper's >>>>> > official page here >>>>> > <http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=KB22474> as >>>>> well as >>>>> > this detailed forum link here >>>>> > < >>>>> http://forums.juniper.net/t5/SRX-Services-Gateway/Best-way- >>>>> of-redundancy-between-SRX-and-EX/td-p/181365 >>>>> > >>>>> > . >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > I wish to have a case where devices are connected criss cross and >>>>> following >>>>> > the documentation I get two ae bundles in EX side and one single reth >>>>> > bundle on SRX side. Both ae bundles on EX side have identical >>>>> configuration >>>>> > and VLAN has both ae interfaces called up. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > If I do not go for criss cross connectivity like this: >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > EX0 (ae1) >> Two Patches to SRX0 (reth1) >>>>> > EX1 (ae2) >> Two Patches to SRX1 (reth1) >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Then it works all well and redundancy works fine. In this case as >>>>> long >>>>> as 1 >>>>> > out of 4 patch is connected connectivity stays live but this has >>>>> trade >>>>> off >>>>> > that if one EX goes down then I cannot make use of other >>>>> corresponding >>>>> SRX. >>>>> > >>>>> > If I do criss connectivity, something like: >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > EX0 (ae1) >> Two Patches to SRX0 (reth1) >>>>> > EX0 (ae1) >> One patch to SRX1 (reth1) >>>>> > >>>>> > EX1 (ae2) >> Two Patches to SRX1 (reth1) >>>>> > EX1 (ae2) >> One patch to SRX0 (reth1) >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > In this config system behaves very oddly with one ae pair (and it's >>>>> > corresponding physical ports) working well while failover to other ae >>>>> > bundle fails completely. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > I was wondering if someone can point me out here. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Appreciate your time and help! >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > -- >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Anurag Bhatia >>>>> > anuragbhatia.com >>>>> > >>>>> > Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> | Twitter >>>>> > <https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia> >>>>> > Skype: anuragbhatia.com >>>>> > >>>>> > PGP Key Fingerprint: 3115 677D 2E94 B696 651B 870C C06D D524 245E >>>>> 58E2 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> Anurag Bhatia >>>> anuragbhatia.com >>>> >>>> Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> | Twitter >>>> <https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia> >>>> Skype: anuragbhatia.com >>>> >>>> PGP Key Fingerprint: 3115 677D 2E94 B696 651B 870C C06D D524 245E 58E2 >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> Anurag Bhatia >> anuragbhatia.com >> >> Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> | Twitter >> <https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia> >> Skype: anuragbhatia.com >> >> PGP Key Fingerprint: 3115 677D 2E94 B696 651B 870C C06D D524 245E 58E2 >> > -- Anurag Bhatia anuragbhatia.com Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia> Skype: anuragbhatia.com PGP Key Fingerprint: 3115 677D 2E94 B696 651B 870C C06D D524 245E 58E2