Re: [j-nsp] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Wojciech Owczarek]

As some have said, EX2300 is the current platform. I am using EX2200C. Pretty 
much the only feature wise decent cheap(ish) fanless switch in existence if you 
ask me. As a L2 switch, no issues, POE works fine. No BGP support, because 
please buy a higher model, but other than that, OSPF, PIM, routing instances, 
fw filters, IPv6, VRRP, GRE tunnels, all working fine. GRE broken in routing 
instances though on latest JunOS for it. This is as far as I've gone with 
protocol support. Solid box. Feels no different to 3200/4200 bar spec and 
features obviously. Did not check dot1x or DHCP helpers which may be of use for 
branch or campus.

Thanks,
Wojciech

  Original Message  
From: dwh...@olp.net
Sent: 8 December 2017 5:41 p.m.
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [j-nsp] What is your experience with the EX2200

We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
experience with these switches?

-- 
Dan White
BTC Broadband
Network Admin Lead
Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
Fax 918.366.6610    email: dwh...@olp.net
http://www.btcbroadband.com
___
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] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Joel Dahl]

I have deployed around 200 EX2200-48P. All running 12.3R12. Only doing some
simple stuff, vlans, static routing. I have no real complaints - they have
been rock solid in our setup. Juniper told me some time ago that it was a
platform on the way out, but I haven't seen any EOL dates yet.

-- 
Joel

On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 11:41:15AM -0600, Dan White wrote:
> We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
> needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
> experience with these switches?
> 
> -- 
> Dan White
> BTC Broadband
> Network Admin Lead
> Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
> Fax 918.366.6610email: dwh...@olp.net
> http://www.btcbroadband.com
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Chuck Anderson]

The most current supported software on EX2200 is 12.3R12--there were
some issues with insufficient flash space for 15.1, so they rolled
back the recommended release to 12.3R12.

They are fairly solid boxes, although I do notice occasional STP
issues on them (Root Bridge changes, Loop Protect activating),
probably when the CPU gets busy and misses some STP BPDUs.  I haven't
seen this issue with our EX4200s.  Luckily it isn't service impacting
in our deployment, since we don't have any redundant links (loops) and
it recovers quickly.

On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 02:06:26PM -0500, Matt Freitag wrote:
> For some reason I also thought the EX2200 EOL date was coming up in a year
> or two but cannot find any sources to prove that.
> 
> My only complaints about the box:
> 
>- Sometimes when they lose power abruptly it corrupts the file system on
>the primary partition. Best way I know of to solve this is a complete
>reinstall of the OS on the routing engine.
>   - This does not affect forwarding at all since the actual packet
>   forwarding happens on a different unit of the box. You'll only see this
>   when you try to SSH to it, for example, and it rejects your attempts by
>   closing your connection.
>- It takes these things a few seconds to commit their config, but I
>think the routing engine runs on an 800MHz CPU and 512MB of RAM. They're
>also quite slow to SSH to, again due to the lack of CPU and memory.
> 
> Otherwise the EX2200 is a really solid platform, but as Saku said Juniper
> moved to the EX2300 a long time ago.
> 
> Matt Freitag
> Network Engineer
> Information Technology
> Michigan Technological University
> (906) 487-3696 <%28906%29%20487-3696>
> https://www.mtu.edu/
> https://www.mtu.edu/it
> 
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Saku Ytti  wrote:
> 
> > Only buy EX2200 if you're buying gray and get them really cheap.
> > Juniper has long since moved to entirely different platform EX2300.
> >
> > On 8 December 2017 at 19:41, Dan White  wrote:
> > > We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
> > > needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
> > > experience with these switches?
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Matt Freitag]

For some reason I also thought the EX2200 EOL date was coming up in a year
or two but cannot find any sources to prove that.

My only complaints about the box:

   - Sometimes when they lose power abruptly it corrupts the file system on
   the primary partition. Best way I know of to solve this is a complete
   reinstall of the OS on the routing engine.
  - This does not affect forwarding at all since the actual packet
  forwarding happens on a different unit of the box. You'll only see this
  when you try to SSH to it, for example, and it rejects your attempts by
  closing your connection.
   - It takes these things a few seconds to commit their config, but I
   think the routing engine runs on an 800MHz CPU and 512MB of RAM. They're
   also quite slow to SSH to, again due to the lack of CPU and memory.

Otherwise the EX2200 is a really solid platform, but as Saku said Juniper
moved to the EX2300 a long time ago.

Matt Freitag
Network Engineer
Information Technology
Michigan Technological University
(906) 487-3696 <%28906%29%20487-3696>
https://www.mtu.edu/
https://www.mtu.edu/it

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Saku Ytti  wrote:

> Only buy EX2200 if you're buying gray and get them really cheap.
> Juniper has long since moved to entirely different platform EX2300.
>
> On 8 December 2017 at 19:41, Dan White  wrote:
> > We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
> > needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
> > experience with these switches?
> >
> > --
> > Dan White
> > BTC Broadband
> > Network Admin Lead
> > Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
> > Fax 918.366.6610email: dwh...@olp.net
> > http://www.btcbroadband.com
> > ___
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>
>
> --
>   ++ytti
> ___
> 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] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Saku Ytti]

Only buy EX2200 if you're buying gray and get them really cheap.
Juniper has long since moved to entirely different platform EX2300.

On 8 December 2017 at 19:41, Dan White  wrote:
> We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
> needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
> experience with these switches?
>
> --
> Dan White
> BTC Broadband
> Network Admin Lead
> Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
> Fax 918.366.6610email: dwh...@olp.net
> http://www.btcbroadband.com
> ___
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp



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

Re: [j-nsp] Enhanced MX480 Midplane?

[Sebastian Becker]

Hi all,

so after checking that with Juniper we have got an update:

MPC7E with SCBE2, Fabric Redundancy, Premium2 und Premium3: 340G

Premium2 Chassis (non-enhanced midplane):
MPC5E   205G
MPC7E   400G - now 340G

Premium3 Chassis (enhanced midplane):
MPC5E   240G
MPC7E   480G - now 340G

So even the MPC7-10G will have a performace penalty on both midplanes in the 
redundancy mode.

— 
Sebastian Becker


> Am 17.11.2017 um 17:38 schrieb Eduard Schornig :
> 
> Hi, 
>   
>  Sebastian is correct, MPC7-MRATE has a performance penalty on old 
> midplane. There is no difference for MPC7-10G (40 x 10G). 
> 
> --
> BR, 
> Eduard Schornig
> 
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Tobias Heister  > wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am 16.11.2017 um 10:36 schrieb Sebastian Becker:
> this is the information out of the "Juniper Tech Club" in Cologne in June 
> 2016. So not only provided to us.
> If needed I can verify that with Juniper.
> 
> Feel free to do that. My informationen and recent verification from Juniper 
> confirm my assumption (hence no speed difference between midplanes for MPC7 
> and only 480G in 3+0)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kind Regards
> Tobias Heister
> ___
> 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] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Tim St. Pierre]

I have a DC model that has well over 1000 days of uptime, not a single 
issue.


I do a lot of vLAN, some IGMP snooping, and use the SFP ports.  I 
haven't done any routing with it as of yet, but it's a great switch for 
simple needs.




On 2017-12-08 12:41 PM, Dan White wrote:

We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
experience with these switches?



--

--
Tim St. Pierre
System Operator
Communicate Freely
289-225-1220 x5101

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

Re: [j-nsp] IPV6 IPFIX Flow issues "nodata" on flow collector.

[Michael Hare]

I am having success with v4 and v6 ipfix on 16.1R6, coming from 14.1R8.  
Collector is nfcapd, tested platform is MX2010 MPC4E.

-Michael

>>-Original Message-
>>From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf
>>Of Gustavo Santos
>>Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 3:44 PM
>>To: sth...@nethelp.no
>>Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>>Subject: Re: [j-nsp] IPV6 IPFIX Flow issues "nodata" on flow collector.
>>
>>Hi Steinar,
>>
>>I am using about the same settings from IPv4 with IPv6 just changing the
>>template version..
>>
>>About the flow monitoring settings I as using the same one as you can see
>>below on IPv4 with IPv6, the current one was done after some tests...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>sampling {
>>traceoptions {
>>file ipfix.log size 10k;
>>}
>>instance {
>>FLOW-INSTANCE {
>>input {
>>rate 1000;
>>max-packets-per-second 1;
>>}
>>family inet {
>>output {
>>flow-server xxx..xxx.xxx{
>>port 9995;
>>autonomous-system-type origin;
>>no-local-dump;
>>version-ipfix {
>>template {
>>ipv4;
>>}
>>}
>>}
>>inline-jflow {
>>source-address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;
>>}
>>}
>>}
>>family inet6 {
>>output {
>>flow-server xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx {
>>port 9995;
>>autonomous-system-type origin;
>>no-local-dump;
>>version-ipfix {
>>template {
>>ipv6;
>>}
>>}
>>}
>>inline-jflow {
>>source-address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;
>>}
>>}
>>}
>>}
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>vlan-id 2XX8;
>>family inet6 {
>>sampling {
>>input;
>>output;
>>}
>>address 2001:xxx:0:xxx::216/64;
>>}
>>
>>
>>
>>flow-monitoring {
>>version-ipfix {
>>template ipv4 {
>>flow-active-timeout 600;
>>flow-inactive-timeout 30;
>>template-refresh-rate {
>>packets 48000;
>>seconds 60;
>>}
>>option-refresh-rate {
>>packets 48000;
>>seconds 60;
>>}
>>ipv4-template;
>>}
>>template ipv6 {
>>flow-active-timeout 150;
>>flow-inactive-timeout 100;
>>template-refresh-rate {
>>seconds 10;
>>}
>>option-refresh-rate {
>>seconds 10;
>>}
>>ipv6-template;
>>}
>>}
>>}
>>
>>2017-12-01 15:10 GMT-03:00 :
>>
>>> > Anyone else had issues with Junos 16.1R4 with IPV6 and IPFIX?
>>> >
>>> > Here we use Plixer Scrutinizer as Flow collector and analyzer. IPv4 flow
>>> > monitoring is working as intended. With IPv6 , looks like the collector
>>> is
>>> > don´t know what to do with the data the Router is sending (MX480).
>>> >
>>> > After a Call , looks like the router is not sending the correct templates
>>> > to Scrutinizer, the only information it can identify is the current
>>> > interface traffic from the flows. But no source and destination ipv6
>>> > address.
>>>
>>> Can't comment on 16.1R4. We're running IPFIX flow collection on 15.1R6
>>> and it seems to be working reasonably well, both for IPv4 and IPv6. No
>>> problem showing IPv6 addresses with nfdump.
>>>
>>> You may want to show your config.
>>>
>>> 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] What is your experience with the EX2200

[Dan White]

We're considering purchasing these switches for our branch offices. Our
needs include PoE, and basic routing functionality. What's been your
experience with these switches?

--
Dan White
BTC Broadband
Network Admin Lead
Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
Fax 918.366.6610email: dwh...@olp.net
http://www.btcbroadband.com
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp