Re: [j-nsp] ERROR: Can't access hard disk
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 05:40:13PM -0600, Onam Rubio wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I tried to partition the hard-disk, but I have an error. > > o...@cale> request system partition hard-disk > mount: /dev/ad1s1e : No such file or directory > ERROR: Can't access hard disk, aborting partition. > > o...@cale> show system boot-messages | match "ad0|ad1" > ad0: Device does not support APM > ad0: 977MB at ata0-master PIO4 > ad1: not attached, missing in Boot List > device_attach: ad1 attach returned 12 > Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/ad0s1a When the router detects an error with one of the drives, it will remove it from the boot list (a custom juniper bios setting). This keeps the OS from even seeing the drive the next time it boots, so a bad drive can't cause the router to stall or crash. This is probably what happened in your case, since ad1 isn't in your boot list. If you want to readd it (to see if its actually broken), drop to shell, su to root, and do: sysctl -w machdep.bootdevs=whatever i.e. take your current bootdevs and add "disk" (the ad1), or whatever you want to do. -- Richard A Steenbergenhttp://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC) ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] ERROR: Can't access hard disk
Hello everyone, I tried to partition the hard-disk, but I have an error. o...@cale> request system partition hard-disk mount: /dev/ad1s1e : No such file or directory ERROR: Can't access hard disk, aborting partition. o...@cale> show system boot-messages | match "ad0|ad1" ad0: Device does not support APM ad0: 977MB at ata0-master PIO4 ad1: not attached, missing in Boot List device_attach: ad1 attach returned 12 Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/ad0s1a o...@cale> _ Discover the new Windows Vista http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] R: Re: MX 80
Correct, 32 k without the R licenze. Max Il giorno 12 mag, 2010 5:49 p., "Jay Hanke" ha scritto: With the license it is 1 M in the FIB and 4 M in the RIB. I believe without the license it is 32k total, but I don't have a conformation on that. -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net[mailto: juniper-nsp-boun...@pu... ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] MX240
Agreed. This is a huge hole in the product line, something low end with a higher density optical (more than 4 sfp) and with all the L2 MEF stuff would be great. -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 12:07 PM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net; Derick Winkworth Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX240 On Wednesday 12 May 2010 09:54:24 pm Derick Winkworth wrote: > I see many MX80s in our future, personally. I still hope Juniper can come up with something for the Metro (Access) which features sufficient intelligence at a decent price. Cheers, Mark. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] MX240
On Wednesday 12 May 2010 09:54:24 pm Derick Winkworth wrote: > I see many MX80s in our future, personally. I still hope Juniper can come up with something for the Metro (Access) which features sufficient intelligence at a decent price. Cheers, Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Junoscriptorium patches?
-- Ross Vandegrift wrote: > Hey Junoscriptorium folks, > > I have a new version of the drain-vrrp script that fixes a lot of > shortcomings, but the author info for that script is incomplete. > Is there someone around that I can send this to? > > Ross Ross, I just fixed the author info for drain-vrrp.slax. The author is Gary Matthews at Juniper. I will put you in touch with Gary and incorporate your change. -- Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 06:48:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Derick Winkworth To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Junoscriptorium patches? Message-ID: <493545.47544...@web180010.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > Speaking of this, I wrote an XSLT library for binary functions, > and then an IP library on top of that uses the binary library to > do fun stuff like adding a decimal number to an IP address... > to help automate provisioning.? Anyone interested in this?? > How could I contribute to junoscriptorium? Derick, I will set up an project committer login for you in junoscriptorium and send you the instruction how to share your binary function library! ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] MX 80
With the license it is 1 M in the FIB and 4 M in the RIB. I believe without the license it is 32k total, but I don't have a conformation on that. -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Alex Kasatkin Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:16 AM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX 80 hi, any info ? regards. On 09.05.2010 23:06, Jay Hanke wrote: > Does anyone know how many routes the MX 80 will handle with and without the > L3 feature license? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jay > > > > > > ___ > 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] MX 80
hi, any info ? regards. On 09.05.2010 23:06, Jay Hanke wrote: Does anyone know how many routes the MX 80 will handle with and without the L3 feature license? Thanks, Jay ___ 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] MX240
The MX80 is relatively inexpensive and has excellent port density. With such a simple config, I'm not even that worried about it being deployed with the JUNOS it requires. You really have three choices I think at release time: 10.1R1, 10.1R2, and 10.2R1. But man, a 48-port copper 10/100/1000 box with 4 built-in 10G ports. Thats nice. If the numbering for the model follows past convention, then this box is an 80G box right? So this box is significantly oversubscribed.. but its 80gbps. Plus it has dual power supplies built in. It kind of makes you wonder what the point of the MX240 is. I guess with the new 3D cards you can get more capacity out of the 240, but why not just buy more MX80s? Its only 10k for the RQ license on the MX80 (I think, I heard... but verify that). The RQ cards on the 240/480/960 are still very expensive. I see many MX80s in our future, personally. Derick From: Mark Tinka To: Keith Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wed, May 12, 2010 3:28:54 AM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX240 On Wednesday 12 May 2010 03:58:40 am Keith wrote: > Yea, but would you like two ASR1002s over one MX240? :) Depends on the situation. If I need only one edge router, the MX240 will be better. If I'm peering and I need no more than a couple of Gbps per router from multiple partners in a PoP, I can spread my risk across two routers. That helps me sleep at night :-). It really all depends on the application. > MX80 is a suggestion. Be interesting to see what the > sales guys can do for us on price for two MX80 instead > of one 240. Let us know how that goes. Cheers, Mark. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Junoscriptorium patches?
Speaking of this, I wrote an XSLT library for binary functions, and then an IP library on top of that uses the binary library to do fun stuff like adding a decimal number to an IP address... to help automate provisioning. Anyone interested in this? How could I contribute to junoscriptorium? From: Tima Maryin To: Cougar Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wed, May 12, 2010 2:01:32 AM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Junoscriptorium patches? Bah!... :-/ Thanks! Cougar wrote: > What is your JUNOS version? Are you sure you didn't mess up when you copied > this script from webpage to file? The best way to copy it is to select "view > source" tab and then copy from there. > >> md5sum dom.slax > 372140186b2b865902565ac466fab566 dom.slax > ___ 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] MX240
On Wednesday 12 May 2010 03:58:40 am Keith wrote: > Yea, but would you like two ASR1002s over one MX240? :) Depends on the situation. If I need only one edge router, the MX240 will be better. If I'm peering and I need no more than a couple of Gbps per router from multiple partners in a PoP, I can spread my risk across two routers. That helps me sleep at night :-). It really all depends on the application. > MX80 is a suggestion. Be interesting to see what the > sales guys can do for us on price for two MX80 instead > of one 240. Let us know how that goes. Cheers, Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Junoscriptorium patches?
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Tima Maryin wrote: I really liked the idea with sh int diagn optics, but when i try to use script i get following error: op dom error: ^ error: error: /var/db/scripts/op/Dom.slax: 1 error detected during parsing error: error reading stylesheet: Dom.slax error: /var/db/scripts/op/Dom.slax:2: error: /var/db/scripts/op/Dom.slax:1: parse error, unexpected L_LESS, expecting K_VERSION before '<': error: ^ error: error: /var/db/scripts/op/Dom.slax: 1 error detected during parsing error: error reading stylesheet: Dom.slax Is there any way to fix it ? What is your JUNOS version? Are you sure you didn't mess up when you copied this script from webpage to file? The best way to copy it is to select "view source" tab and then copy from there. md5sum dom.slax 372140186b2b865902565ac466fab566 dom.slax -- Cougar ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Junoscriptorium patches?
Bah!... :-/ Thanks! Cougar wrote: What is your JUNOS version? Are you sure you didn't mess up when you copied this script from webpage to file? The best way to copy it is to select "view source" tab and then copy from there. md5sum dom.slax 372140186b2b865902565ac466fab566 dom.slax ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
