[j-nsp] Route-aggregation
Using route-aggregation like the below.. set routing-options aggregate route 172.16.0.0/26 community 65535:1 set routing-options aggregate route 172.16.0.0/26 discard to advertise routes to ebgp peers, this works well if the routes in the table are a /27 or below. However this does not work if the route in my table is a /26 Is there a way to advertise the /26 out using the aggregate route option? Kind of tell the router advertise everything /26 and more specific? ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Share static routes between routing-instances on EX series
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:29:29PM +, Andy Litzinger wrote:
> I can create a routing-instance for each group (or 1 and use the global table
> for the other). Adding the RVIs and maintaining a separate default route out
> for each routing-instance is no problem. The trouble is trying to allow the
> subnets to communicate to each other.
>
> I've tried adding a static route under the routing-instance for Group 1 to a
> subnet outside the routing-instance, e.g. a route to subnet C inside
> routing-instance for Group1, but the route never shows up in the routing
> table, presumably because there isn't a live interface in routing-instance C
> with a connection to subnet C. and it doesn't look like there's an option to
> make the next-hop an interface instead of an IP.
> I will try rib groups next, but I think I read somewhere that EX switches
> don't support importing static routes via rib groups.
The Junos-way is to use rib-groups to copy direct (interface) routes
between routing-instances. Static routes shouldn't be necessary. I
don't know if there are limitations on EX.
routing-options {
interface-routes {
rib-group {
inet IF-RIB;
}
}
rib-groups {
IF-RIB {
import-rib [ inet.0 VRF-A.inet.0 VRF-B.inet.0 ];
}
}
}
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Share static routes between routing-instances on EX series
Hi Andy, On 19/06/2013, at 9:29 AM, Andy Litzinger wrote: > > I will try rib groups next, but I think I read somewhere that EX switches > don't support importing static routes via rib groups. > > I suppose this could also be solved by Filter Based Forwarding, but I'd like > to avoid that if possible; it just doesn't seem as clean. > > thanks in advance! > -andy The "normal" way to do it would be to have your static route with a "next-table" action, however it doesn't look like the EX (12.3) gives you that option (SRX and MX - no problem). Which leaves you with either filter-based forwarding and the "routing-instance" action / rib-groups. Ben ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Share static routes between routing-instances on EX series
I have a network that contains two distinct groups of servers.
Group1 with subnets A,B
Group2 with subnets C,D
Both groups use RVIs on a core VC (mix of EX4550s and 4200s) as their default
route. There are two different paths out of the network. I'd like Group1 to
take path1 and Group2 to take path2. Subnets A,B,C and D should be able to
communicate directly, preferably within the VC (not out to another device and
back).
I can create a routing-instance for each group (or 1 and use the global table
for the other). Adding the RVIs and maintaining a separate default route out
for each routing-instance is no problem. The trouble is trying to allow the
subnets to communicate to each other.
I've tried adding a static route under the routing-instance for Group 1 to a
subnet outside the routing-instance, e.g. a route to subnet C inside
routing-instance for Group1, but the route never shows up in the routing table,
presumably because there isn't a live interface in routing-instance C with a
connection to subnet C. and it doesn't look like there's an option to make the
next-hop an interface instead of an IP.
group1-vr {
instance-type virtual-router;
interface vlan.A;
routing-options {
static {
route C.0/23 next-hop C.1;
}
}
}
root@ex# run show route
group1-vr.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
A.0/23 *[Direct/0] 1d 00:52:00
> via vlan.A
A.1/32 *[Local/0] 1d 00:52:00
Local via vlan.A
I will try rib groups next, but I think I read somewhere that EX switches don't
support importing static routes via rib groups.
I suppose this could also be solved by Filter Based Forwarding, but I'd like to
avoid that if possible; it just doesn't seem as clean.
thanks in advance!
-andy
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] QinQ
Hi Mohammad, Can you share your current configurations and the topology details? Also, please explain how you're testing this and what you're seeing or not seeing. -Thanks, Jared From: Mohammad Khalil To: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net" Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 1:49 AM Subject: [j-nsp] QinQ Hi all , i am trying to implement QinQ between mx480 and ex4200 , does anyone have previous experience with that ? 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] QinQ
Hi all , i am trying to implement QinQ between mx480 and ex4200 , does anyone have previous experience with that ? Thanks ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
