[j-nsp] equivalent of transparent-as
Dear all, In quangga, there is transparent-as to hide our own ASN. Is there any similar function in Juniper? Thank you, br Suginto ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] equivalent of transparent-as
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos/topics/example/bgp-local-as-private.html -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Suginto Hung Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 10:38 AM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] equivalent of transparent-as Dear all, In quangga, there is transparent-as to hide our own ASN. Is there any similar function in Juniper? Thank you, br Suginto ___ 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] EX VC mixed mode experience
I'm wondering if anybody have info or experience in a scenario with mixed virtual-chassis (6 equipments between 4500 and 4200) with high density (more or less 70) of 10GBs ports. Since these architecture should be placed in a very sensitive position (servers and storage managing online systems of an important airport), I'd like to have some informal feedbacks if any problems or whatelse have been experienced by somebody... Why chose this design ? only costs... Tks ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] SRX240 Series and BGP Routes (and other things)
I guess it has to do with the EOL announcement for the J series where the SRX is promoted as the successor platform. For full tables, the J series were the smallest Juniper routers that you could buy and with 2GB of RAM they work very well. I'm sad to see them gone. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX VC mixed mode experience
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Riccardo S dim0...@hotmail.com wrote: I'm wondering if anybody have info or experience in a scenario with mixed virtual-chassis (6 equipments between 4500 and 4200) with high density (more or less 70) of 10GBs ports. Since these architecture should be placed in a very sensitive position (servers and storage managing online systems of an important airport), I'd like to have some informal feedbacks if any problems or whatelse have been experienced by somebody... Why chose this design ? only costs... Sounds like carrier grade to me. My understanding is there is still no high-speed stacking module for the EX4500 expansion slot. Your virtual-chassis obviously won't approach full wire-speed. With that said, when you need a mixture of 1000baseT and SFP+ ports, it is a decent configuration. ARP still sucks on the small-EX platforms but it has improved in 12.3, which is a welcome change. Still pretty bad though. They have made `clear arp` do what it's supposed to do, but I guess adding something like `clear arp interface foo all` was too hard. Go figure. -- Jeff S Wheeler j...@inconcepts.biz Sr Network Operator / Innovative Network Concepts ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX VC mixed mode experience
We have deployed a mixed mode 4500/4200 small VC as a part of mobile network core and it is running smoothly so far. We don't have significant throughput, and we don't run any fancy features. It's simply serves as L2 port extension for MX routers. We have also tried to deploy mixed mode between 4550 and 4200 for an ISP and had serious issues with arp replies not being forwarded from the 4200 to hosts on the 4550. JTAC are working on this and we rolled back to using the switches as standalone and interconnected the switches using a LAG. Amos Sent from my iPhone On 1 Mar 2013, at 17:52, Riccardo S dim0...@hotmail.commailto:dim0...@hotmail.com wrote: I'm wondering if anybody have info or experience in a scenario with mixed virtual-chassis (6 equipments between 4500 and 4200) with high density (more or less 70) of 10GBs ports. Since these architecture should be placed in a very sensitive position (servers and storage managing online systems of an important airport), I'd like to have some informal feedbacks if any problems or whatelse have been experienced by somebody... Why chose this design ? only costs... Tks ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.netmailto: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] SRX AV cloud vs on-device
Hi all, we're looking at an SRX 550 and have been posed with the choice between using the cloud based anti-virus or the on-device. Are there any compelling reasons to pick one over the other? thanks! -andy ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Krt queue high priority
# set policy-options policy-statement test term 1 then priority ? Possible completions: high Set priority to high low Set priority to low medium Set priority to medium On 2/24/13 1:06 AM, Darren O'Connor darre...@outlook.com wrote: Hi all. If you do a show krt status there is a 'high priority' field. Any idea how to ensure certain prefixes actually go into this high priority queue instead of all of the going through the normal queue? Tis would speed up the programming of certain prefixes into the fib in a failure event. Thanks ___ 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] Lab gear to mimic MX80?
Hey everyone, I'd like to pick up a few pieces of gear to simulate our MX80's in production. We wouldn't necessarily need the same amount of memory, throughput etc just feature set and general config. I've been using SRX220's for everything up to now, but thats not always accurate to what I'd see on an MX box. Would it be safe to say I could pickup the relatively cheap J2350 boxes and stick the same version of JunOS on them and have a pretty similar experience? Not like the MX80 has any processing cards or anything special like the higher end MX boxes can take. -- Thanks, Morgan ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Lab gear to mimic MX80?
ACX would do better, it uses same JUNOS build (for PowerPC) as MX80. Thanks Alex - Original Message - From: Morgan McLean wrx...@gmail.com To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 11:12 PM Subject: [j-nsp] Lab gear to mimic MX80? Hey everyone, I'd like to pick up a few pieces of gear to simulate our MX80's in production. We wouldn't necessarily need the same amount of memory, throughput etc just feature set and general config. I've been using SRX220's for everything up to now, but thats not always accurate to what I'd see on an MX box. Would it be safe to say I could pickup the relatively cheap J2350 boxes and stick the same version of JunOS on them and have a pretty similar experience? Not like the MX80 has any processing cards or anything special like the higher end MX boxes can take. -- Thanks, Morgan ___ 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
