Re: [j-nsp] Going Juniper

[Josh Reynolds]

There are x86 based routing platforms doing many tens of Gbps easily in
software. Things like vpp.io, DPDK, and others are driving things like FRR,
Cumulus, and now TNSR drastically forward.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 10:40 AM  wrote:

> On 04/09/2018 08:07 PM, Chris via juniper-nsp wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 10/04/2018 9:45 AM, mike+j...@willitsonline.com wrote:
> >>  I see there is a terrific amount of used mx104 and mx240 out there
> >> and the specs all seem great. What I'm looking to do is have 2x 10g
> >> feeds, route bgp, do flow exporting, and do a certain amount of ingress
> >> filtering to protect the network from ddos.Id even like to do cgnat for
> >> up to 5000 users but not sure if a single box setup would be wise.
> >
> > I can't speak for the MX240, but we have some deployments of the
> > MX104, MX80 and the vMX.
> >
> > For the MX104 (and the MX80) the main limitation they have is that the
> > CPU on the routing engine is terribly slow. This can be a problem for
> > you if you are taking multiple full tables with BGP. Even without
> > taking full tables, the RE CPU on the MX104's I have is basically
> > always at 100%. Commits are pretty slow as well. This shouldn't be
> > such an issue with the MX240 as it has a wider range of routing
> > engines available with much better specs.
> >
> > The MX104's (and MX80's) have the MS-MIC-16G installed. We use the
> > MS-MIC-16G for IPSEC, NAT and stateful firewalling (service filters
> > are used to only send certain traffic to the stateful firewall). So
> > far there has only been 1 issue that I have personally encountered
> > with the MS-MIC-16 - the card has crashed on a previous release of
> > JunOS when adding a large number of IPSEC peers. Since upgraded I have
> > not experienced the same issue though.
> >
> > I also have some vMX's deployed (they are running on top of Dell
> > R740's with 3 x Intel X710 cards to give 12 x 10G interfaces). The
> > painful part on getting the vMX to work was the host setup with KVM -
> > the documents are severly lacking on Junipers side (but I have written
> > up the exact instructions to get the most recent 18.1R1 release
> > working on CentOS with no issues).
> >
> > So far after getting the issues with the KVM host ironed out I have
> > been very happy with the performance of the vMX. Since 17.4R1 you can
> > deploy a virtual MS-MPC (which requires extra CPU resources) which
> > will give you NAT support as well as stateful firewalling support.
> > Since its virtualised and the RE runs as a seperate VM you can assign
> > more or less resources to it as needed - I have 16G of RAM allocated
> > with 6 cores and the time to process/install a full table is only a
> > few seconds. They have survived some DDoS attacks that were large
> > enough to fill up the transit links with no issues as well. The
> > biggest thing is to make sure you get NIC's that support SR-IOV and
> > make sure the CPU is fast enough/has enough cores for your
> > requirements (you cannot over-allocate the cores!). For my use case, I
> > don't think I will be buying any more physical MX's unless I have an
> > actual reason to need their hardware, the vMX suites my needs just
> > fine. Juniper does provide a (limited) demo of the vMX, happy to send
> > you the install guide I wrote up for getting it working on KVM with
> > CentOS 7.4 (Ubuntu is also supported for KVM but the install process
> > is basically terrible).
>
> I have a lot of experience and confidence running embedded linux as a
> router doing bgp/ospf and so forth. Also running pfsense in virtual
> machines for various features. Never knew juniper had a software only
> option, that is pretty interesting to me.
>
> I know it can be set up and run like a champ and do some (undefined)
> number of gigabits without issue. What concerns me is that there are
> performance limitations in these software only platforms based on your
> processor/bus/card choices, and of course the performance of a software
> hash vs a hardware cam for forwarding table lookups. And usually
> (imho),  you hit the platform limits like a truck running into a brick
> wall. However, if I knew I was only going to have just a few gbps (3?),
> I likely would be very interested doing a live deployment. However, with
> that said, it certainly is interesting enough to investigate and I'd
> love to see your writeup. At a minimum it sounds very useful and I may
> use vMX for pre-deployment testing purposes.
>
> On your mx104 you said cpu was pegged at %100 - operationally does this
> cause you any grief? How long does it take for your routes to recover
> after a peer flaps? (eg: your sending traffic to a dead peer before
> forwarding is updated to remove those). If you are logged in doing
> normal network stuff like looking up routes or making minor config
> updates, is the cli slogwash or can you move around and work?
>
> Thank you so much for the feedback!
>
> Mike-
>
> 

Re: [j-nsp] tl1 transaction language

[Josh Reynolds]

https://noc.surfsara.nl/nrg/TL1-Toolkit/

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 10:31 PM, jayshankar nair via juniper-nsp
 wrote:
> Hi,
> I am working on tl1 transaction language1 for management of network elements. 
> Is there any documentation or sample code ( C/Linux) available.
> All help appreciated.
> Thanks,Jayshankar
> ___
> 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] ACX5048 - 40 gbps ER 40 km optic

[Josh Reynolds]

Wrap it around a pencil a few times

On Oct 5, 2017 8:34 AM, "Chuck Anderson"  wrote:

> Insert a 3dB or 7dB attenuator pad for lab testing.  In a pinch (no pun
> intended) you can take a fiber jumper and bend it tightly into a loop (like
> 1/4" diameter) to attenuate the signal, but I would use a disposable jumper
> for that.  Use a twist tie or similar to hold it in the tight loop.
> Monitor the receive power level while adjusting the tightness of the loop
> until it is lower than -5 dBm but higher than -20 dBm.
>
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 07:04:05PM -0500, Aaron Gould wrote:
> > Well, when the transport eng I work with found out that I had these two
> 40km optics connected with a 3’ jumper he ran into the lab to disconnect
> it…. So that’s probably why you see no light right now…. Lemme get back
> into the office Monday and we will go from there… yeah, as I mentioned I’m
> working with my Juniper account SE on this, so he may update support matrix
> if he discovers they are good…. I dunno.
> ___
> 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] MPC-3D-16XGE-SFP

[Josh Reynolds]

O I'm sorry you are absolutely right. I'm thinking about EX4500 ports
for some reason.

I remember having to use a 10G uplink port on a switch to connect in to a
port on that line card for a 1g device as an emergency bandaid now that I
think about it.

On Aug 31, 2016 7:02 PM, "Dragan Jovicic" <dragan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Those are specifically 10G ports not 1G.
> We run these on some of our MX960 and MX480, both toward core and edge.
> They are fine high density 10G cards.
>
> Things to note. Card has 4 PFE; each MQ chip is good for ~70Gbps give or
> take +/- 10Gbps depending on packet sizes.
> This packet memory bandwidth is shared between both wan-facing and
> fabric-facing ports.
>
> Meaning, if you run wan-fabric traffic you get 35Gbps max. If you run
> wan-wan traffic you can get near line-rate (this is how fabricless mx80
> gets ~80Gbps).
>
> This is the definition of "full line rate" with these MPC2 cards.
>
> Regards
>
> Dragan
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is it actually SFPP? If so, I've had a couple of these. With a regular SCB
>> you can only run line rate on 12 ports. With the enhanced SCB you can run
>> line rate on all 16, if memory serves. Supports GE and 10G SFP modules.
>>
>> I don't know about any warnings or concerns on your chassis as I ran these
>> on MX960's.
>>
>> On Aug 31, 2016 5:33 PM, "John Brown" <j...@citylinkfiber.com> wrote:
>>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> I've received some pretty good pricing on the MPC-3D-16XGE-SFP card,
>> and was wondering what the list.wisdom is ??
>>
>> We are an ISP.  That will be the usage.
>> Some ports will have BGP, many will be static routed.
>>
>> Will this run full line rate on all 16 ports ?
>> Can I run multiple ISP type clients on this card ?
>>
>> What should I worry about ?
>>
>> Going into a MX480 chassis with MPC2 and MPC3 cards existing.
>>
>> 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
>>
>
>
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MPC-3D-16XGE-SFP

[Josh Reynolds]

Is it actually SFPP? If so, I've had a couple of these. With a regular SCB
you can only run line rate on 12 ports. With the enhanced SCB you can run
line rate on all 16, if memory serves. Supports GE and 10G SFP modules.

I don't know about any warnings or concerns on your chassis as I ran these
on MX960's.

On Aug 31, 2016 5:33 PM, "John Brown"  wrote:

 Hi,

I've received some pretty good pricing on the MPC-3D-16XGE-SFP card,
and was wondering what the list.wisdom is ??

We are an ISP.  That will be the usage.
Some ports will have BGP, many will be static routed.

Will this run full line rate on all 16 ports ?
Can I run multiple ISP type clients on this card ?

What should I worry about ?

Going into a MX480 chassis with MPC2 and MPC3 cards existing.

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

Re: [j-nsp] Basic NAT44 on MS-MPC implementation help

[Josh Reynolds]

Oops, forgot service filter part:

set firewall family inet service-filter sf-in term 1 from
source-address 100.64.0.0/10
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-in term 1 from
destination-address 0.0.0.0/0
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-in term 1 from
destination-address 100.64.0.0/10 except
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-in term 1 then count sf-in-filter-hit
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-in term 1 then service
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-in term 2 then skip
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-out term 1 then count
sf-out-filter-excluded-from-nat
set firewall family inet service-filter sf-out term 1 then skip

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
> Here's what I've got going on now...
>
> set services nat pool centralolt01 address xx.yy.196.3/32
> set services nat rule cgnat match-direction input
> set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 from source-address 100.64.1.0/24
> set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 from destination-address 
> 0.0.0.0/0
> set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 then translated
> source-pool centralolt01
> set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 then translated
> translation-type dynamic-nat44
>
> set services service-set cgnat nat-rules cgnat
> set services service-set cgnat interface-service service-interface ms-4/0/0
>
> set chassis fpc 4 pic 0 inline-services bandwidth 20g
>
> set interfaces ms-4/0/0 unit 0 family inet
>
> set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service input service-set cgnat
> service-filter sf-in
> set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service output service-set cgnat
> service-filter sf-out
>
> MAP: WAN <- border mx -><- core mx (ms-mpc-128) ->
> transport routers
>
> Between the border mx and core is a LAG group with OSPF running on it,
> same goes between the core mx and the transport routers.
>
> Filter: __service-cgnat:sf-in
> Counters:
> NameBytes  Packets
> sf-in-filter-hit54354  824
>
> Filter: __service-cgnat:sf-out
> Counters:
> NameBytes  Packets
> sf-out-filter-excluded-from-nat  1006452919915
>
> So my rule is getting hit, but for some reason traffic can't make it
> past the core router to the border. Is it because this address pool
> I'm using for SNAT is done inline, and doesn't actually exist
> anywhere? If that's so, it makes sense, I just don't know how to go
> about fixing that.
>
> Any help or insight would be appreciated. Thank you.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
>> Hi all.
>>
>> I've gone through quite a few pages of juniper techpubs, but I'm
>> having a problem figuring out how to correctly implement your
>> standard, run of the mill NAT (ipv4) using an MS-MPC-128
>>
>> Part of this may be design or topology related, and I was wondering if
>> someone could help me figure out a solution.
>>
>>
>> WAN-<ae0->CORE (MX960)<-ae1->EX4500
>>
>> So I have a couple of ports on the EX4500's with different RFC6598
>> (CGNAT Range) subnets on them (routed ports), for various different
>> things (say range1, range2, range3, etc)
>>
>> All I want to do, is route any traffic coming in to the CORE from
>> range1/2/3/etc to  a certain /32 (a different /32 for each range).
>> Pretty simple, your basic NAT setup.
>>
>> My problem I think is how to apply this in somewhat a transparent
>> fashion. Currently, what I've pulled up off the web seems to break all
>> the things, as it seems like everything is getting forwarded through
>> the ms-mpc interface.
>>
>> Here's what I have so far, if somebody could help me out real quick or
>> show me another method it would be greatly appreciated.
>> -
>>
>> customer ip range x.x.x.x
>> range to snat to y.y.y.y
>>
>> set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service input service-set CGNAT
>> set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service output service-set CGNAT
>> set interfaces ms-3/0/0 unit 0 family inet
>>
>> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-http
>> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-ftp
>> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-tftp
>> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-telnet
>> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-sip
>>
>> se

Re: [j-nsp] Basic NAT44 on MS-MPC implementation help

[Josh Reynolds]

Here's what I've got going on now...

set services nat pool centralolt01 address xx.yy.196.3/32
set services nat rule cgnat match-direction input
set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 from source-address 100.64.1.0/24
set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 from destination-address 0.0.0.0/0
set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 then translated
source-pool centralolt01
set services nat rule cgnat term THINGTONAT1 then translated
translation-type dynamic-nat44

set services service-set cgnat nat-rules cgnat
set services service-set cgnat interface-service service-interface ms-4/0/0

set chassis fpc 4 pic 0 inline-services bandwidth 20g

set interfaces ms-4/0/0 unit 0 family inet

set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service input service-set cgnat
service-filter sf-in
set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service output service-set cgnat
service-filter sf-out

MAP: WAN <- border mx -><- core mx (ms-mpc-128) ->
transport routers

Between the border mx and core is a LAG group with OSPF running on it,
same goes between the core mx and the transport routers.

Filter: __service-cgnat:sf-in
Counters:
NameBytes  Packets
sf-in-filter-hit54354  824

Filter: __service-cgnat:sf-out
Counters:
NameBytes  Packets
sf-out-filter-excluded-from-nat  1006452919915

So my rule is getting hit, but for some reason traffic can't make it
past the core router to the border. Is it because this address pool
I'm using for SNAT is done inline, and doesn't actually exist
anywhere? If that's so, it makes sense, I just don't know how to go
about fixing that.

Any help or insight would be appreciated. Thank you.



On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I've gone through quite a few pages of juniper techpubs, but I'm
> having a problem figuring out how to correctly implement your
> standard, run of the mill NAT (ipv4) using an MS-MPC-128
>
> Part of this may be design or topology related, and I was wondering if
> someone could help me figure out a solution.
>
>
> WAN-<ae0->CORE (MX960)<-ae1->EX4500
>
> So I have a couple of ports on the EX4500's with different RFC6598
> (CGNAT Range) subnets on them (routed ports), for various different
> things (say range1, range2, range3, etc)
>
> All I want to do, is route any traffic coming in to the CORE from
> range1/2/3/etc to  a certain /32 (a different /32 for each range).
> Pretty simple, your basic NAT setup.
>
> My problem I think is how to apply this in somewhat a transparent
> fashion. Currently, what I've pulled up off the web seems to break all
> the things, as it seems like everything is getting forwarded through
> the ms-mpc interface.
>
> Here's what I have so far, if somebody could help me out real quick or
> show me another method it would be greatly appreciated.
> -
>
> customer ip range x.x.x.x
> range to snat to y.y.y.y
>
> set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service input service-set CGNAT
> set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service output service-set CGNAT
> set interfaces ms-3/0/0 unit 0 family inet
>
> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-http
> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-ftp
> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-tftp
> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-telnet
> set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-sip
>
> set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data match-direction
> input-output
> set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data term 1 from
> source-address x.x.x.x/24
> set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data term 1 from
> application-sets accept-algs
> set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data term 1 then accept
> set services nat pool napt-pool address y.y.y.y/32
> set services nat pool napt-pool port automatic auto
>
> set services nat rule nat-rule1 match-direction input
> set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 from source-address
> x.x.x.x/24 // NAT for the customer side
> set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 from application-sets 
> accept-algs
> set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 then translated
> source-pool napt-pool
> set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 then translated
> translation-type napt-44
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] Basic NAT44 on MS-MPC implementation help

[Josh Reynolds]

Hi all.

I've gone through quite a few pages of juniper techpubs, but I'm
having a problem figuring out how to correctly implement your
standard, run of the mill NAT (ipv4) using an MS-MPC-128

Part of this may be design or topology related, and I was wondering if
someone could help me figure out a solution.


WAN-CORE (MX960)<-ae1->EX4500

So I have a couple of ports on the EX4500's with different RFC6598
(CGNAT Range) subnets on them (routed ports), for various different
things (say range1, range2, range3, etc)

All I want to do, is route any traffic coming in to the CORE from
range1/2/3/etc to  a certain /32 (a different /32 for each range).
Pretty simple, your basic NAT setup.

My problem I think is how to apply this in somewhat a transparent
fashion. Currently, what I've pulled up off the web seems to break all
the things, as it seems like everything is getting forwarded through
the ms-mpc interface.

Here's what I have so far, if somebody could help me out real quick or
show me another method it would be greatly appreciated.
-

customer ip range x.x.x.x
range to snat to y.y.y.y

set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service input service-set CGNAT
set interfaces ae1 unit 0 family inet service output service-set CGNAT
set interfaces ms-3/0/0 unit 0 family inet

set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-http
set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-ftp
set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-tftp
set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-telnet
set applications application-set accept-algs application junos-sip

set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data match-direction
input-output
set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data term 1 from
source-address x.x.x.x/24
set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data term 1 from
application-sets accept-algs
set services stateful-firewall rule centralolt01-data term 1 then accept
set services nat pool napt-pool address y.y.y.y/32
set services nat pool napt-pool port automatic auto

set services nat rule nat-rule1 match-direction input
set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 from source-address
x.x.x.x/24 // NAT for the customer side
set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 from application-sets accept-algs
set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 then translated
source-pool napt-pool
set services nat rule nat-rule1 term nat-term1 then translated
translation-type napt-44
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] mixed interface, switching + routed

[Josh Reynolds]

Thanks Hugo, I'll try and give that a shot.

So basically setup an ethernet-switching interface on unit 0, port
mode trunk, native vlan as the current access vlan, member list
includes the new vlan? I think I'm confused about how I would assign
an RVI to this in that state.

Do you have a quick example config I might be able to work off of?

Thank you!

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue 2016-Jul-05 13:23:38 -0500, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> wrote:
>
>> EX4500
>
>
> This would be done with flexible-ethernet-services on MX, but I don't
> believe it's supported to mix L2 and L3 on the same port on the EX4500.
> We've tried that on 4550, and you can't mix family ethernet-switching with
> e.g. vlan-tagging, which is what you would use for your L3 unit.
>
> You could change the interface into a trunk, run your existing access vlan
> as native, and create an RVI for your L3 interface, but that may or may not
> cut it depending on what you need that L3 interface for.
>
>
> --
> Hugo Slabbert   | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com
> pgp key: B178313E   | also on Signal
>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue 2016-Jul-05 13:17:52 -0500, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure this is a fairly basic question, but I'm having trouble
>>>> finding a solution.
>>>>
>>>> I have a port that is currently an ethernet switching port, set in
>>>> access mode that is tagging a vlan for upstream. This works fine. What
>>>> I'd like to do, is add a sub interface on the master port (say, unit
>>>> 600 / vlan 600) that is a tagged/routed interface.
>>>>
>>>> I've tried to do this a couple of ways now, and every time I seem to
>>>> get thrown a different error.
>>>>
>>>> Anybody have any tips?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Support for this varies depending on what platform you are using.  You
>>> haven't told us what equipment you're talking about.
>>>
>>>> Thanks :)
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] mixed interface, switching + routed

[Josh Reynolds]

EX4500

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue 2016-Jul-05 13:17:52 -0500, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm sure this is a fairly basic question, but I'm having trouble
>> finding a solution.
>>
>> I have a port that is currently an ethernet switching port, set in
>> access mode that is tagging a vlan for upstream. This works fine. What
>> I'd like to do, is add a sub interface on the master port (say, unit
>> 600 / vlan 600) that is a tagged/routed interface.
>>
>> I've tried to do this a couple of ways now, and every time I seem to
>> get thrown a different error.
>>
>> Anybody have any tips?
>
>
> Support for this varies depending on what platform you are using.  You
> haven't told us what equipment you're talking about.
>
>> Thanks :)
>
>
> --
> Hugo Slabbert   | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com
> pgp key: B178313E   | also on Signal
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] mixed interface, switching + routed

[Josh Reynolds]

Hello,

I'm sure this is a fairly basic question, but I'm having trouble
finding a solution.

I have a port that is currently an ethernet switching port, set in
access mode that is tagging a vlan for upstream. This works fine. What
I'd like to do, is add a sub interface on the master port (say, unit
600 / vlan 600) that is a tagged/routed interface.

I've tried to do this a couple of ways now, and every time I seem to
get thrown a different error.

Anybody have any tips?

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

Re: [j-nsp] Best Place to Buy Used Juniper

[Josh Reynolds]

Either directly from Juniper, or Terabit Systems. Juniper will come with
TAC but the price will be a lot higher. Terabit will give you no TAC
access, but better pricing and 1yr hardware warranty.
On Mar 26, 2016 12:11 PM, "Colton Conor"  wrote:

> Where is the best place to buy used Juniper gear?
> ___
> 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] MX960 2x MS-MPC-128

[Josh Reynolds]

4 High Output AC supplies, only 3 16x10Gbps cards installed with no
optics in them yet

Power is okay, it's not doing anything yet :P Good idea though!

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Chuck Anderson <c...@wpi.edu> wrote:
> Not enough power to power up the card?
>
> show chassis power
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 01:50:44PM -0600, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>> Hi all.
>>
>> Pair of MS-MPC-128's. 1st card boots, second card doesn't. Swapped FPC
>> locations, now the 2nd card boots in the first card's spot, but the
>> 1st card won't boot in the previous spot of the 2nd card. Have tried
>> several other slots for the 2nd card the with same results.
>>
>> show chassis hardware recognizes the MS-MPC-128 is installed, but no
>> power. request chassis fpc online slot X shows: "Online initiated, use
>> "show chassis fpc" to verify", but "show chassis fpc" still shows it's
>> powered off.
>>
>> What gives?
>>
>> Thanks
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] MX960 2x MS-MPC-128

[Josh Reynolds]

Hi all.

Pair of MS-MPC-128's. 1st card boots, second card doesn't. Swapped FPC
locations, now the 2nd card boots in the first card's spot, but the
1st card won't boot in the previous spot of the 2nd card. Have tried
several other slots for the 2nd card the with same results.

show chassis hardware recognizes the MS-MPC-128 is installed, but no
power. request chassis fpc online slot X shows: "Online initiated, use
"show chassis fpc" to verify", but "show chassis fpc" still shows it's
powered off.

What gives?

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