Re: [j-nsp] How useful is Juniper storm control?
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 14:29:35 + From: James S. Smith jsm...@windmobile.ca Subject: [j-nsp] How useful is Juniper storm control? I'm looking for people's experience with storm control on Juniper switches. We have a pair of EX4500 switches and I notice that storm control kicks in a lot. I'm concerned that it might be stopping legitimate broadcast and multicast traffic. Depends on what you consider legitimate, both quality and quantity wise. MS Windows NLB (Network Load Balancing) floods stuff, so I have ~250Mbps minimum of flooded traffic on that VLAN... We disabled storm control on the ports in that specific VLAN, and yes, we really will do normal loadbalancing if I can get the Exchange admins to budge... Do most people have storm control enabled or disabled? Enabled, it can prevent other bad stuff, like looped traffic, not per se a loop on the specific switch. Plus, it's a switch, not a hub. :) Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] How useful is Juniper storm control?
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 14:29:35 + From: James S. Smith jsm...@windmobile.ca Subject: [j-nsp] How useful is Juniper storm control? I'm looking for people's experience with storm control on Juniper switches. We have a pair of EX4500 switches and I notice that storm control kicks in a lot. I'm concerned that it might be stopping legitimate broadcast and multicast traffic. Depends on what you consider legitimate, both quality and quantity wise. MS Windows NLB (Network Load Balancing) floods stuff, so I have ~250Mbps minimum of flooded traffic on that VLAN... We disabled storm control on the ports in that specific VLAN, and yes, we really will do normal loadbalancing if I can get the Exchange admins to budge... Do most people have storm control enabled or disabled? Enabled, it can prevent other bad stuff, like looped traffic, not per se a loop on the specific switch. Plus, it's a switch, not a hub. :) Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Best route reflector platform
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 13:34:29 -0500 From: Richard A Steenbergen r...@e-gerbil.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Best route reflector platform I begged them to do this right when that box first came out, but there were no takers. They cripple it in software so the XRE can't be made to run rpd stand-alone and act as a route reflector. Weirdly enough, I spotted these (new) guys in the Juniper GPL: * MX240-RR-AC-B: MX240 route reflector AC bundle * S-RR: Route Reflector (RR) Software license for JCS1200 Spacewise I'd opt for the MX240, but an XRE would be better indeed. There's also SRX-BGP-ADV-LTU for Advanced BGP License for SRX 650 only (Route Reflector), though I wonder how far it'll scale... Anybody try to see if a Route Reflector in Junosphere's VJX worked ? Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 generates power supply and fan alarms when environment is good
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 11:48:32 + From: Peter Tavenier peter.taven...@vancis.nl Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 generates power supply and fan alarms when environment is good Which other problems do 12.3 have with the chassisd process? I've seen the health-monitoring stuff ignore it's timelimit for traps (not fully reproducable) on EX. 12.3 has LLDP fixes/features that make it a choice hard to ignore in a mixed environment, both EX and MX. Not doing any exciting stuff with 12.3 on EX yet though. Now 12.3 on MX VC with L2CPd thrashing seems to be something else... :( Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 generates power supply and fan alarms when environment is good
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 21:12:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 generates power supply and fan alarms when environment is good Was busy with other things, so didn't bother to contact JTAC yet, think I should have a good laugh this weekend with them on this. :) last few weeks others complained as well, resulting in two PR's: PR 858565 - CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Fan/Blower Removed traps generated periodically https://prsearch.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=prcontentid=PR858565 Resolved In 12.3R2 PR 842933 - CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Power Supply Removed traps generated periodically https://prsearch.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=prcontentid=PR842933 Resolved In 12.3R2 Now let's see if Juniper actually releases R2 quickly. Does seem like these issues should have been caught in Beta or PreDeployment. :( Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 generates power supply and fan alarms when environment is good
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:04:49 + From: Peter Tavenier peter.taven...@vancis.nl Subject: [j-nsp] EX4200 generates power supply and fan alarms when environment is good On my EX4200 running version 12.3R1.7 is see the following alarms in the logging: Mar 21 08:46:46 hostname chassisd[1290]: %DAEMON-5-CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Power Supply Removed (jnxContentsContainerIndex 2, jnxContentsL1Index 1, jnxContentsL2Index 3, jnxContentsL3Index 0, jnxContentsDescr Power Supply: Power Supply 2 @ 0/2/*, jnxOperatingState/Temp 1) ... 41 more times same type of alarms ... Mar 21 08:46:46 hostname chassisd[1290]: %DAEMON-5-CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Fan/Blower Removed (jnxContentsContainerIndex 4, jnxContentsL1Index 2, jnxContentsL2Index 1, jnxContentsL3Index 1, jnxContentsDescr FAN: Fan 1 @ 1/0/0, jnxOperatingState/Temp 1) Mar 21 08:46:46 hostname chassisd[1290]: %DAEMON-5-CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Power Supply Removed (jnxContentsContainerIndex 2, jnxContentsL1Index 8, jnxContentsL2Index 1, jnxContentsL3Index 0, jnxContentsDescr Power Supply: Power Supply 0 @ 7/0/*, jnxOperatingState/Temp 1) Mar 21 08:46:46 hostname chassisd[1290]: %DAEMON-5-CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Fan/Blower Removed (jnxContentsContainerIndex 4, jnxContentsL1Index 2, jnxContentsL2Index 1, jnxContentsL3Index 2, jnxContentsDescr FAN: Fan 2 @ 1/0/1, jnxOperatingState/Temp 1) Mar 21 08:46:46 hostname chassisd[1290]: %DAEMON-5-CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Power Supply Removed (jnxContentsContainerIndex 2, jnxContentsL1Index 8, jnxContentsL2Index 3, jnxContentsL3Index 0, jnxContentsDescr Power Supply: Power Supply 2 @ 7/2/*, jnxOperatingState/Temp 1) ... 32 more times same type of alarms ... Seen here on EX2200C's, EX4200's and EX4500's as well, even funnier, take a look at what items it is actually complaining about: non-existing components, basically all other _possible_ VC members. Was busy with other things, so didn't bother to contact JTAC yet, think I should have a good laugh this weekend with them on this. :) Mind you, identical configs do not exhibit this on 11.4 or 12.1. Would guess this is either a 12.2 or (more likely) a 12.3 oddity. Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] LACP to NetApp
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 10:43:07 -0800
From: Crist Clark cjc+j-...@pumpky.net
Subject: [j-nsp] LACP to NetApp
aggregated-ether-options {
lacp {
active;
periodic slow;
}
}
I prefer to always set fast active on either side. So far it has
avoided and fixed more issues then all the vendors telling me I
shouldn't have two sides active...
Has anyone here seen LACP problems with NetApp or other vendors?
Did see a weird issues once with a Nexus vPC and NetApp. Nothing so
far with MixedMode EX VC and various NetApps, LACP on GE's and 10GE's.
Have you tried a monitor traffic session on the EX VC to see if you
do or do not see LACPDU's ?
Also, remember the NetApp LAG (ifgrp) commands can also give you an
idea of what it is thinking/believing about it all... Especially
nested groups have an actual traffic test built-in it seems...
Kind regards,
JP Velders
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] CWDM optics support on EX4500
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:19:16 -0600 From: Chris Wopat m...@falz.net Subject: [j-nsp] CWDM optics support on EX4500 I tried some 3rd party Cisco coded optics and oddly they're detected as SFP+. Dumb question: did you set the port to 1g speed ? Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4200-48PX/PoE+
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 09:33:18 + From: Nikolay Abromov nabro...@gmail.com Subject: [j-nsp] EX4200-48PX/PoE+ However, the PoE budget is equal to 740 W, which means PoE (740/48 = 15.4). I am really confused. Does this platform support full PoE+ on all 48 ports or it does support it only as protocol, but doesn't have enough power to provide 30W on each port (which means 1440 W for PoE budget). The EX4200 930W PSU's have 740W PoE(+) budget. If you need the full 48 port PoE+ usage, I'd use two PSU's. The EX4200 line supports two PSU's inside of the chassis itself (not some external RPS) after all, but do remember to set priorities for the ports in regards to PoE(+) in case a PSU or feed fails. Also note that through LLDP-MED's a lot of VoIP phones (and hopefully other PoE-capable devices) are able to do more granular signaling of their power needs then Class 1-3 or more, giving you more headroom in regards to PoE(+) budget. Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Junos 12.3 Release Date
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:07:53 +0100 From: Andrei-Marius Radu andr...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Junos 12.3 Release Date As far as I am aware 12.3 will be released at the beginning of 2013 and indeed it will be an EEOL release. The release notes and documentation have been put on-line already, probably due to the planned release date of Jan 31st 2013. I guess they might've delayed release due to PSN-2013-01-823, but that's speculation. For everyone who wants to know what's new or broken: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos12.3/information-products/topic-collections/release-notes/12.3/index.html Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] high 10GE port density in EX switch?
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 14:51:02 -0800 From: Brent Jones br...@brentrjones.com Subject: Re: [j-nsp] high 10GE port density in EX switch? There is always the EX4550, 32 10Gb ports in 1U, with a module to add 8 more I believe Two module slots in fact. With 10GE and VC modules released. The 40GE module should debute somewhere this year (so they keep telling me). If you're going the _physical_ VC route with VCP ports it would give you 2.5:1 oversubscription (32 x 10Gbps vs 4 x 32Gbps). Going VCPe you can do a bit better with 2:1 oversubscription. If doing that look into the traffic patterns to figure out how far you can stretch the Virtual Chassis (max 10 members) before creating contention. I haven't seen official specs for the EX9200 yet, but supposedly that should fill the gap between EX8200 and MX I'm told. Apart from Qfabric itself, the QFX3600 with MC-LAG might also be a nice consolidation layer with its 16 QSFP+ ports between an MX and a bunch of VC'd EX4550's. Don't know if the routing on there (with VRRP and filtering) is beefy enough for the needs. In the end it boils down to not just the port-count, but the traffic and usage patterns. Unfortunately those aren't always that clear up front (or even in hindsight ;D). Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX to Cat6500 link?
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 19:39:31 -0400 From: William McLendon wimcl...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX to Cat6500 link? just to close this out -- we were able to get the circuit up and running -- the issue was with how the Ciena gear was configured. I've never done work on Ciena gear but it had something to do with a GFP setting. Whatever it was set to, they changed it and up popped the circuit and the BGP session. GFP is an encapsulation used on the WDM/TDM (grey area) side. Link state propagation works seperately from the data plane... :( Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] jnxOperatingTemp issues on ex4500?
(i.e. zero). Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:53:42 -0700 From: Jonathan Call lordsit...@hotmail.com Subject: [j-nsp] jnxOperatingTemp issues on ex4500? If I run 'show snmp mib walk jnxOperatingTemp' [ ... ] on an ex4500-40f all of the entries return a non-operational status (i.e. zero). All of them are running 11.4R1.6. Same here on 2 mixed VC's (4200-48t+4500-40f) and 1 non-mixed. Only non-zero ones in a mixed VC are: jnxOperatingTemp.7.1.0.0 = 0 jnxOperatingTemp.7.2.0.0 = 30 jnxOperatingTemp.7.3.0.0 = 36 jnxOperatingTemp.7.4.0.0 = 0 Which would equate to the 4200's being members 12 (0-3 total)... Kind regards, JP Velders ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
