Re: [j-nsp] SRX & MPLS

[Chris Kawchuk]

Shouldn't affect it in the classical BGP active./backup sense; only 1 'vrf' is 
active in a multi-homing BGP setup.

However, since the SRX/J doesn't do that, both will end up being active -  
You'll need a way to suppress one of them from getting any traffic. Perhaps 
think about using an EX4200 underneath using an RTG to each SRX at layer 2 to 
prevent the loop.

Should have zero effect on vrrp/layer-3 stuff.

- CK.


On 23/08/2012, at 7:47 PM, Johan Borch  wrote:

> Your'e right of course :)
>  
> My question was more how the VPLS multihoming will affect this setup.
>  
> Regards
> Johan
> 
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Chris Kawchuk  wrote:
> Err VPLS Implies Layer 2 only.
> 
> Where is the VRP runninng in-between? Are you doing "vlan-id" inside the VPLS 
> instance for normalization, then binding an irb.x into it? I dont think that 
> works in SRX/J either. (l3 within VPLS).
> 
> - CK.
> 
> On 2012-08-23, at 6:39 PM, Johan Borch wrote:
> 
> > "VPLS multihoming, which allows connecting a CE device to multiple PE
> > routers to provide redundant connectivity, is not supported on J Series or
> > SRX Series devices"
> >
> > I'm going to have two SRX's on each site and using vrrp between them, will
> > I hit this exception then?
> 
> 


___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

[Patrick Dickey]

Just FYI:
The Juniper SKU for the MX c19/c20 power cord is CBL-MX-PWR-C19-C20 if anyone 
needed it.
 
 
Patrick



From: joel jaeggli 
To: JA  
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net 
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

On 8/23/12 6:59 AM, JA wrote:
> Hi
>
> I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.
>
> Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
> while Juniper has no provision for such power cords.
we use c19-c20 cables. we have a standard supplier for those so I don't 
believe we're using a juniper p/n

the device (well the whole rack) is fed off two PDUs with a 30a 3 phase 
service for each
>  If European power
> cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
> outlets. But there is no Schuko PDU that supports more than 16A. One can
> easily exceed 16A if two power supplies are connected on same PDU.
>
> Can anyone recommend some alternative or if anyone faced similar situation?
> ___
> 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

Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

[joel jaeggli]

On 8/23/12 6:59 AM, JA wrote:

Hi

I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.

Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
while Juniper has no provision for such power cords.
we use c19-c20 cables. we have a standard supplier for those so I don't 
believe we're using a juniper p/n


the device (well the whole rack) is fed off two PDUs with a 30a 3 phase 
service for each

  If European power
cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
outlets. But there is no Schuko PDU that supports more than 16A. One can
easily exceed 16A if two power supplies are connected on same PDU.

Can anyone recommend some alternative or if anyone faced similar situation?
___
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

Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

[Scott Harvanek]

You can easily get >30A PDUs with L6-20Rs which is what Juniper 
recommends for the MX960...


e.g. 
http://www.apc.com/products/resource/include/techspec_index.cfm?base_sku=AP7893


Geist, ServerTech, etc. all also make many many options.

-Scott H.
-Login Inc.
On 08/23/2012 07:59 AM, JA wrote:

Hi

I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.

Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
while Juniper has no provision for such power cords. If European power
cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
outlets. But there is no Schuko PDU that supports more than 16A. One can
easily exceed 16A if two power supplies are connected on same PDU.

Can anyone recommend some alternative or if anyone faced similar situation?
___
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

Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

[OBrien, Will]

We run 208v to ours, which reduces the amp load. Then we use 1u rackable 
tripplite PDUs on 30a circuits with C13s and C19s and C19-C20 cables.

Will

On Aug 23, 2012, at 8:59 AM, JA wrote:

> Hi
> 
> I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.
> 
> Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
> while Juniper has no provision for such power cords. If European power
> cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
> outlets. But there is no Schuko PDU that supports more than 16A. One can
> easily exceed 16A if two power supplies are connected on same PDU.
> 
> Can anyone recommend some alternative or if anyone faced similar situation?
> ___
> 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

Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

[Julien Goodwin]

I double checked the hardware guide to ensure, and they're not fixed cable:

http://www.juniper.net/shared/img/products/mx-series/mx960/mx960-rear-high.jpg

(If you're using the high-cap supplies there's a second input on the
PSU's themselves)

So just 8x C18-19 cables would be fine.

On 23/08/12 23:59, JA wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.
> 
> Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
> while Juniper has no provision for such power cords. If European power
> cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
> outlets. But there is no Schuko PDU that supports more than 16A. One can
> easily exceed 16A if two power supplies are connected on same PDU.
> 
> Can anyone recommend some alternative or if anyone faced similar situation?
> ___
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


-- 
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
"Blue Sky Solutioneering"



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip

[JA]

Hi

I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.

Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
while Juniper has no provision for such power cords. If European power
cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
outlets. But there is no Schuko PDU that supports more than 16A. One can
easily exceed 16A if two power supplies are connected on same PDU.

Can anyone recommend some alternative or if anyone faced similar situation?
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] Arbor peak flow sp and TMS

[EZ Joe]

Hi expert

Do Juniper have equivalent product?

With Regard
Wan T

- Via Aiped
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)

[Md. Jahangir Hossain]

Thanks Apurva for your information.








 From: apurva modh 
To: Md. Jahangir Hossain  
Cc: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"  
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
 

All the Routing engine bound traffic into Juniper is handled through the 
loopback interface. So if you apply the input direction filter on the loopback 
interface, it would simulate the exact behavior of the control plane filter of 
cisco. You dont need to apply "protect routing-engine" filter to physical 
interfaces. 

Hope this solves your query.

Regards,



On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Md. Jahangir Hossain  
wrote:

Dear all friend:
>
>Wishes all are fine.
>
>I quit new in juniper OS platform . i need some information about juniper 
>Control Plan Policy (CoPP). i read  the RFC 6192 of  Protect Router Control 
>Plane which is:
>
>
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6192#appendix-A.2
>
>
>
>After reading the RFC 6192 i have a  little query as like,In cisco router we 
>put input policy on control plan.
>
>as like;
>
>control-plane service-policy input COPPBut in Juniper router we put input 
>policy into loopback interface according to this RFC .
>
>Here this is:
>
>interfaces { lo0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input 
>protect-router-control-plane; }Based on my question is, how
>juniper router loopback interface control all router control plan ? or i need 
>to put this input filter policy individually on different
>interfaces as like:
>
>
>interfaces{ em0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input 
>protect-router-control-plane; }
>
>interfaces { em1 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input 
>protect-router-control-plane; }
>it would be nice for me can anyone please confirm me about this configuration .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Thanks
>Jahangir Hossain
>___
>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

Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)

[Md. Jahangir Hossain]

Thanks Doug for your information.





- Original Message -
From: Doug Hanks 
To: Md. Jahangir Hossain ; "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net" 

Cc: 
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)

This should walk you through most of your questions:

http://www.juniper.net/us/en/community/junos/training-certification/day-one
/fundamentals-series/securing-routing-engine/

Doug





On 8/22/12 8:35 PM, "Md. Jahangir Hossain"  wrote:

>Dear all friend:
>
>Wishes all are fine.
>
>I quit new in juniper OS platform . i need some information about juniper
>Control Plan Policy (CoPP). i read  the RFC 6192 of  Protect Router
>Control Plane which is:
>
>
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6192#appendix-A.2
>
>
>
>After reading the RFC 6192 i have a  little query as like,In cisco router
>we put input policy on control plan.
>
>as like;
>
>control-plane service-policy input COPPBut in Juniper router we put input
>policy into loopback interface according to this RFC .
>
>Here this is:
>
>interfaces { lo0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
>protect-router-control-plane; }Based on my question is, how
>juniper router loopback interface control all router control plan ? or i
>need to put this input filter policy individually on different
>interfaces as like:
>
>
>interfaces{ em0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
>protect-router-control-plane; }
>
>interfaces { em1 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
>protect-router-control-plane; }
>it would be nice for me can anyone please confirm me about this
>configuration .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Thanks
>Jahangir Hossain
>___
>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

Re: [j-nsp] SRX & MPLS

[Johan Borch]

Your'e right of course :)

My question was more how the VPLS multihoming will affect this setup.

Regards
Johan

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Chris Kawchuk wrote:

> Err VPLS Implies Layer 2 only.
>
> Where is the VRP runninng in-between? Are you doing "vlan-id" inside the
> VPLS instance for normalization, then binding an irb.x into it? I dont
> think that works in SRX/J either. (l3 within VPLS).
>
> - CK.
>
> On 2012-08-23, at 6:39 PM, Johan Borch wrote:
>
> > "VPLS multihoming, which allows connecting a CE device to multiple PE
> > routers to provide redundant connectivity, is not supported on J Series
> or
> > SRX Series devices"
> >
> > I'm going to have two SRX's on each site and using vrrp between them,
> will
> > I hit this exception then?
>
>
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] SRX & MPLS

[Chris Kawchuk]

Err VPLS Implies Layer 2 only. 

Where is the VRP runninng in-between? Are you doing "vlan-id" inside the VPLS 
instance for normalization, then binding an irb.x into it? I dont think that 
works in SRX/J either. (l3 within VPLS).

- CK.

On 2012-08-23, at 6:39 PM, Johan Borch wrote:

> "VPLS multihoming, which allows connecting a CE device to multiple PE
> routers to provide redundant connectivity, is not supported on J Series or
> SRX Series devices"
> 
> I'm going to have two SRX's on each site and using vrrp between them, will
> I hit this exception then?


___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] SRX & MPLS

[Johan Borch]

I saw the following exceptions for SRX-series:

"VPLS multihoming, which allows connecting a CE device to multiple PE
routers to provide redundant connectivity, is not supported on J Series or
SRX Series devices"

I'm going to have two SRX's on each site and using vrrp between them, will
I hit this exception then?

Regards
Johan

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Phil Mayers wrote:

> On 15/08/12 15:29, Johan Borch wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a design question regarding MPLS.
>>
>> I'm planning to create a MPLS rings with 4-8 SRX240 devices in packet mode
>> and the main purpose is L3VPN/VPLS
>>
>> p1-p2-p3-p4-p5-p1 (p5 connects back to p1)
>>
>> My budget is low for this and the srx240 is cheap, we will push max 1Gbps.
>>
>
> That should be ok. I've had hundreds of megabits of MPLS out of the SRX210.
>
>
>
>> For example in some sites there will be two SRX and the plan is to use
>> these two as P/PE and use VRRP for customer equipment. At the same time
>> they will be P routers for other sites.
>>
>> Example site:
>>
>> P1P3-P4--P5
>>   \  /
>>  (vrrp)
>>  Customer equipment
>>
>> Do I make any sense? Will this work? :)
>>
>
> Should do. We use them in similar (but not identical) configurations.
>
> I've never tested VRRP on them, however.
> __**_
> 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