Re: [j-nsp] Logical systems on an M7i

[Doug Hanks]

15.  Should be fine for personal use.  It really just spawns another
instance of rpd.

Thank you,

-- 
Doug Hanks - JNCIE-ENT #213,  JNCIE-SP #875
Sr. Systems Engineer
Juniper Networks



On 2/29/12 9:51 AM, "Tom Storey"  wrote:

>Hi everyone.
>
>Can anyone provide any pointers for the maximum number of logical
>systems one could expect to run on an M7i?
>
>As I understand it, each logical system has its own batch of processes
>running on the RE, so I am assuming the number is going to be some
>function of how much RAM you have on it.
>
>I am looking at using an M7i or two in a lab, with not very large
>tables (basically just the topology of the lab itself), but want to
>maximise the number of logical routers I can run to allow for
>vast/complex topologies. Ideally I would be able to run 20 logical
>systems.
>
>There are quite a few M7i's floating around on ebay with RE-400-768's,
>or even RE-400-256's (though RAM should be quite easy to upgrade.) The
>maximum number of logical systems per box is supposed to be 15, but
>with a RE-400-768, that gives roughly 50mb of RAM to each one,
>excluding the overhead for the system itself. How much RAM is required
>to run one? Can an RE-400 expand past 768mb?
>
>RE-850-1536 would give about double the RAM for each logical system
>and Im sure a decent boost in responsiveness due to faster CPU, but
>are about as rare as hens teeth with a price to match.
>
>Price is a big constraint since this will be for personal use, so
>while I know the MX80 is a nice box, it is out of my reach
>financially. :-)
>
>Thanks,
>Tom
>___
>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] IS-IS routes not installed

[Kevin Wormington]

Thanks for the heads up.  igmp-snooping is not enabled on any VLANs on 
the EX.  I think it didn't work without point-to-point because of having 
the two addresses configured on the same unit on one node.  Just for 
kicks I reconfigured that to have two units using VLANs and it would 
work without the point-to-point.


On 02/29/2012 12:36 PM, Paul Zugnoni wrote:

FWIW, check that you don't have igmp-snooping enabled on the EX for the
VLANs where you have IS-IS traffic; it'll eat your Hello's. Having
point-to-point configured can obfuscate the cause of your original problem.

On Feb 24, 2012, at 13:55 , Kevin Wormington wrote:


Thanks to all that replied. Adding point-to-point on all the IS-IS
interfaces
seems to make it work in the lab anyway.

Kevin

On 02/24/2012 11:51 AM, sth...@nethelp.no 
wrote:

This is a single level (level2 only) single area setup. As to why the


if I remember my ISIS correctly, you need L1 adjacencies within the
same area.


No. IS-IS works just great with level 2 only peerings. We have

level 2 wide-metrics-only;
level 1 disable;

on all our M/MX routers.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no


___
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] IS-IS routes not installed

[Paul Zugnoni]

FWIW, check that you don't have igmp-snooping enabled on the EX for the VLANs 
where you have IS-IS traffic; it'll eat your Hello's. Having point-to-point 
configured can obfuscate the cause of your original problem.

On Feb 24, 2012, at 13:55 , Kevin Wormington wrote:

Thanks to all that replied.  Adding point-to-point on all the IS-IS interfaces
seems to make it work in the lab anyway.

Kevin

On 02/24/2012 11:51 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
This is a single level (level2 only) single area setup. As to why the

if I remember my ISIS correctly, you need L1 adjacencies within the
same area.

No. IS-IS works just great with level 2 only peerings. We have

level 2 wide-metrics-only;
level 1 disable;

on all our M/MX routers.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no
___
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

[j-nsp] Logical systems on an M7i

[Tom Storey]

Hi everyone.

Can anyone provide any pointers for the maximum number of logical
systems one could expect to run on an M7i?

As I understand it, each logical system has its own batch of processes
running on the RE, so I am assuming the number is going to be some
function of how much RAM you have on it.

I am looking at using an M7i or two in a lab, with not very large
tables (basically just the topology of the lab itself), but want to
maximise the number of logical routers I can run to allow for
vast/complex topologies. Ideally I would be able to run 20 logical
systems.

There are quite a few M7i's floating around on ebay with RE-400-768's,
or even RE-400-256's (though RAM should be quite easy to upgrade.) The
maximum number of logical systems per box is supposed to be 15, but
with a RE-400-768, that gives roughly 50mb of RAM to each one,
excluding the overhead for the system itself. How much RAM is required
to run one? Can an RE-400 expand past 768mb?

RE-850-1536 would give about double the RAM for each logical system
and Im sure a decent boost in responsiveness due to faster CPU, but
are about as rare as hens teeth with a price to match.

Price is a big constraint since this will be for personal use, so
while I know the MX80 is a nice box, it is out of my reach
financially. :-)

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

Re: [j-nsp] MX960: High CPU FPC

[Evgeniy Aikashev]

Hello Tomas,
> what junos version are you running ?
10.0R4.7

> sh sched
Here threads looks a root of my issue. What does this means?

Total uptime 0+06:38:59, (23939325 ms), 166489067 thread dispatches
CPU load is 100% (5 second), 91% (1 minute)
Total network interrupt time 0 (usec)

 CPU   Name  Time(ms)
  0%   Idle  153550
 96%Threads  23015410
  3%ISR  770365
  3%Level 1  738990
  0%Level 2  28085
  0%Level 3  5
  0%Level 5  3285


> sh nvram
System NVRAM :
 32751 available bytes, 2734 used, 30017 free
 Contents:
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG] IPV4 Init: Set the IP IRI to 0x8015
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG] IPV4 Init: Set the IP IRI to 0x8015
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[Oct 13 09:12:30.407 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side closed connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:62466).(serverRouter:chassis)
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[Oct 13 09:52:22.298 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side closed connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:2050).(serverRouter:chassis)
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[Jul 20 10:07:35.343 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46085).(serverRouter:ppm)
[Jul 20 10:07:35.873 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46083).(serverRouter:pfe)
[Jul 20 10:07:35.874 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46084).(serverRouter:985)
[Jul 20 10:07:35.875 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46081).(serverRouter:l2ald)
[Jul 20 10:07:35.876 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46082).(serverRouter:chassis)
[Jul 20 12:24:23.141 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46109).(serverRouter:985)
[Jul 20 12:24:23.184 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46116).(serverRouter:ppm)
[Jul 20 12:24:23.414 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46087).(serverRouter:pfe)
[Jul 20 12:24:23.416 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46088).(serverRouter:chassis)
[Jul 20 12:24:23.417 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46119).(serverRouter:l2ald)
[Oct 17 01:00:46.236 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46123).(serverRouter:chassis)
[Oct 17 01:00:46.249 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side reset connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:46122).(serverRouter:pfe)
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[Feb 29 07:30:56.988 LOG: Emergency] <160>RDP: Remote side closed connection: 
rdp.(fpc0:34818).(serverRouter:chassis)
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized

ROM NVRAM:
 0 available bytes, 0 used, 0 free


> sh syslog messages
[LOG] issu_cmlc_fpc_common_issu_msg: Error BLOB, no handle for Blob DB Init
[LOG] chassis_db_set_dpc_simulation: options = 0!!
[LOG]  otn_priodic ON
[LOG] if_notify_init: IF notify list already initialized
[0+00:00:10.715 LOG: Debug] pfesvcs_init: Module init done
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] pic_system_init: total slot 1
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] pic_system_init: will call pic_periodic_init
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] pic_system_init: pic sys ready
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] ICMP: Init of per-iff rate to (500)
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] [cospic_qdpc_init] cosfpc_vectors initialized
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] [cospic_mt_init] cosfpc_vectors already initialized
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] cosman_fpc_init: FC based rewrite is ON for fpc
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Info] cos_module_init: FC based rewrite is ON for pfe
[0+00:00:11.185 LOG: Debug] SNTP: Daemon created
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Info] PPMAN: Established connection to ppmd
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Info] L2ALM: Established connection to Master, 0x417753a0
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Notice] L2ALM master RE connection made
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Debug] CMLC: Using IDR encoding
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Info] PFEMAN: Session manager active
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Info] PFEMAN: pfeman_start_service_bulkget
[0+00:00:11.190 LOG: Debug] COSFPC: Initializing periodic
[Feb 29 07:46:09.645 LOG: Info] SNTPD: Initial time of day set.
[Feb 29 07:46:09.645 LOG: Info] Version 10.0R4.7 by builder on 2010-08-22 
03:32:27 UTC
[Feb 29 07:46:09.645 LOG: Info] On-board NVRAM contains diagnostic information.
[Feb 29 07:46:09.645 LOG: Info] cmsfpc_restart_normal: C

Re: [j-nsp] MX960: High CPU FPC

[Evgeniy Aikashev]

Hi,

> Are you running any L2 services on these cards?  Could it be a layer2
> loop somewhere.
No. Only ipv4 and v6 routing. A lot of bgp sessions

> Sure, it doesn't make too much sense to be triggered by
> a RE switchover
Before a switchover, with RE0 as a primary, had no CPU problem..

> I assume the high load reappears once you've re-enabled said ports?

Yes. You are right.
For example each port of fpc2 is a member of some lags.
Aggregated interface: ae2
 xe-2/0/0  Current   Slow periodic Collecting distributing
 xe-7/2/0  Current   Slow periodic Collecting distributing
  xe-4/2/0  Current   Slow periodic Collecting distributing
  xe-4/3/0  Current   Slow periodic Collecting distributing

There are a normal CPU on all other fpcs
 Temp  CPU Utilization (%)   MemoryUtilization (%)
Slot State(C)  Total  Interrupt  DRAM (MB) Heap Buffer
 4  Online25 12  0   1024   46 31
 7  Online24 12  0   1024   46 30

 And remains the stable when I shut  xe-2/0/0


best regards,
-- 
Evgeniy



Wednesday, February 29, 2012, 2:06:27 PM, Colin wrote:
> On 29/02/2012 9:54 PM, Evgeniy Aikashev wrote:
>> Good day,
>> I have MX960 with 2 RE.
>> Yesterday after switchover to backup RE (disk fail was the reason), I see 
>> high CPU utilization for fpc0 and fpc2  DPCE-R line cards.
>> I changed the cards, sfps but it not help. Also I found out if I disable 
>> pics xe-2/0/0 and xe-2/1/0 the CPU utilization for fpc2 decreases to normal 
>> ~10-15%.
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> evgeniy@mx960-slave>  show chassis fpc
>>   Temp  CPU Utilization (%)   MemoryUtilization (%)
>> Slot State(C)  Total  Interrupt  DRAM (MB) Heap Buffer
>>0  Online29 86  2   1024   46 31
>>1  Online27 10  0   1024   46 31
>>2  Online25100  3   1024   46 30
>>3  Online24 12  0   1024   46 31
>>4  Online25 12  0   1024   46 31
>>
>> Regards,
>> Evgeniy


> Are you running any L2 services on these cards?  Could it be a layer2 
> loop somewhere.  Sure, it doesn't make too much sense to be triggered by 
> a RE switchover but it sounds somewhat strange that disabling certain 
> ports fixes it.

> I assume the high load reappears once you've re-enabled said ports?

> HTH,
> Col

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

Re: [j-nsp] 100Base-LX10 and MX80

[Brandon Ross]

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, �~Aukasz Dudzi�~Dski wrote:


I did it already. The topic you have mentioned does not cover the
essence of my question. I've asked for that specific SFP (100Base-LX10),
not for using third party optics at all. The problem is that I don't
know if it is possible to use 100Base-LX10 optics in MX80, because
Juniper documentation does not mention about 100Base-LX10 SFP. There is
a note regarding 100Base-FX (FE on MMF), but no 100Base-LX10 (FE on SMF).


Apologies, I will be more specific.

Juniper does not support or sell an LX10 optic.

Since it is impossible to use a Juniper optic that doesn't exist, if your 
requirement is for LX10, your only choice is to purchase 3rd party.


I have used 3rd party LX10 optics (along with just about any other kind of 
optic you can imagine) on MX series with no problem.  Heck I even 
RECOMMEND to my clients to save money by using 3rd party optics (but I 
might have a bias since my wife sells them).


Other people will tell you not to use 3rd party optics for the before 
mentioned reasons.


--
Brandon Ross  Yahoo & AIM:  BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667ICQ:  2269442
Schedule a meeting:  https://tungle.me/bross Skype:  brandonross___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] 100Base-LX10 and MX80

[Łukasz Dudziński]

W dniu 29.02.2012 14:26, Brandon Ross pisze:
> On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, �ukasz Dudzi�ski wrote:
> 
>> Do you have some experience with that type of SFP on MX80 platform ? If
>> it is supported on MX80 (by 'supported' I mean - it's working, not that
>> I can get support from JTAC in that type of SFP issues), what kind of
>> SFP you have ? Original, Juniper signed (designed for other
>> router/switch series) or third party ?
> 
> Check the list archives, we JUST discussed the use of 3rd party optics a
> week or so ago.

I did it already. The topic you have mentioned does not cover the
essence of my question. I've asked for that specific SFP (100Base-LX10),
not for using third party optics at all. The problem is that I don't
know if it is possible to use 100Base-LX10 optics in MX80, because
Juniper documentation does not mention about 100Base-LX10 SFP. There is
a note regarding 100Base-FX (FE on MMF), but no 100Base-LX10 (FE on SMF).

-- 
Pozdrawiam,
Łukasz Dudziński

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

Re: [j-nsp] 100Base-LX10 and MX80

[Brandon Ross]

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, ?ukasz Dudzi?ski wrote:


Do you have some experience with that type of SFP on MX80 platform ? If
it is supported on MX80 (by 'supported' I mean - it's working, not that
I can get support from JTAC in that type of SFP issues), what kind of
SFP you have ? Original, Juniper signed (designed for other
router/switch series) or third party ?


Check the list archives, we JUST discussed the use of 3rd party optics a 
week or so ago.


The bottom line is that some people (me for example) see no problem at all 
with using 3rd party optics, and have used them in multiple installations 
without any more problems than Juniper own optics cause.


Other folks believe that you shouldn't use 3rd party optics because 
Juniper won't support them, and because availability, quality and sourcing 
are questionable.


I suggest you read the archives and come to your own conclusion.

--
Brandon Ross  Yahoo & AIM:  BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667ICQ:  2269442
Schedule a meeting:  https://tungle.me/bross Skype:  brandonross___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] 100Base-LX10 and MX80

[Łukasz Dudziński]

Hi Guys,

There is MX80 equipped with MIC 3D 20x1GE SFP. Documentation says
(http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/general/mic-mx-series-gigabit-ethernet-sfp-description.html)
that only SFP modules I can use in that line card are:

- 100BASE-FX (model number: SFP-1FE-FX)
- 1000BASE-LH (model number: SFP-1GE-LH)
- 1000BASE-LX (model number: SFP-1GE-LX)
- 1000BASE-SX (model number: SFP-1GE-SX)

The problem is that I need to connect a device equipped with
100Base-LX10 interface.

In my opinion the main difference between 100Base-FX and 100Base-LX10
SFP modules is on optical side. It shouldn't be a problem for vendor to
support 100Base-LX10 SFP, if 100Base-FX is already supported.

Do you have some experience with that type of SFP on MX80 platform ? If
it is supported on MX80 (by 'supported' I mean - it's working, not that
I can get support from JTAC in that type of SFP issues), what kind of
SFP you have ? Original, Juniper signed (designed for other
router/switch series) or third party ?

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

[j-nsp] MX960: High CPU FPC

[Evgeniy Aikashev]

Good day,
I have MX960 with 2 RE.
Yesterday after switchover to backup RE (disk fail was the reason), I see high 
CPU utilization for fpc0 and fpc2  DPCE-R line cards.
I changed the cards, sfps but it not help. Also I found out if I disable pics 
xe-2/0/0 and xe-2/1/0 the CPU utilization for fpc2 decreases to normal ~10-15%.
Any ideas?

evgeniy@mx960-slave> show chassis fpc
 Temp  CPU Utilization (%)   MemoryUtilization (%)
Slot State(C)  Total  Interrupt  DRAM (MB) Heap Buffer
  0  Online29 86  2   1024   46 31
  1  Online27 10  0   1024   46 31
  2  Online25100  3   1024   46 30
  3  Online24 12  0   1024   46 31
  4  Online25 12  0   1024   46 31 

Regards,
Evgeniy 


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

Re: [j-nsp] Decent J-Series software version

[Timh Bergström]

We are running 10.4r7.5 with security on dual stack with static routing, dhcp 
(IPv4) and RA (IPv6) for the office, it Works ok, but had to upgrade the ram 
and cf. We are running j2320. We also have one j2320 running on 
10.4R8-something for our IX peerings, both v4/v6. I've disabled all security 
and run it in packet mode though, it also has 2GB ram and the bigger cf.

Both of them average below 100mbps though and the office router handles about 
65 employees easily.

My best bet would be the latest 10.4-version or the latest 
service-release/recommended.

//T

On 28 feb 2012, at 23:23, Yucong Sun (叶雨飞)  wrote:

> any one?
> 
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Yucong Sun (叶雨飞)  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have two j2350, one with 9.3r4.4, and the other I am trying to find
>> a good version to upgrade to, with security features. So far I have
>> tried:
>> 
>> 1) 10.1 - 10.2R4, those runs okay, but they only have half-ass ipv6 support.
>> 2) 10.4R8, crash once a month or so, msut be manually rebooted, plus
>> they basically just hose horribly under 20kpps or 200k sessions.
>> 3) 11.X crash on boot directly
>> 
>> they both are taking full BGP feeds, and I've upgraded them both to
>> 2.5G ram, and I even upgraded on-board cpu to 3G model.
>> 
>> anyway I'm about to give up on any hope to use non-packet mode on
>> these routers, my money would have been much better spend if I just
>> buy a decent dell server and good network cards, they all handles tons
>> of tons more sessions just fine, any similar experiences?
> 
> ___
> 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