[j-nsp] About Juniper load balacing beween two PE router and two CE router through multipath
Dear all , I'm trying to test the load balancing of two links where two CE routers connected with two PE routers and load balancing of two links between PE to CE . I have configured a routing instance named AAA and found that routing table information of AAA.inet.0 is not present in inet.0 so that IBGP between PE1 and PE2 not passing CE routing information each other trough iBGP . I think i need to import routing table from AAA.inet0 (vrf instance) to inet.0 . Besides i have found a same scenario in bellow link but problem to insert route from routing instance (AAA.inet0) to inet.0 https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junose15.1/topics/example/simple/mbgp-vpn-enable-ebgp-ecmp.html if you have any suggestion and more information to resolve this load balancing problem then it would be appreciate . Regards / Jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Getting unusual log in juniper MX480 router / fpc0 Next-hop resolution requests from interface throttled
Dear all ,
I'm getting unusual log in juniper MX480 router like ,
/kernel: agg_pfe_get_fwd_options: lt-0/0/0: ifd is NULL or ifl is not aggregate
/kernel: agg_pfe_fwd_options_proc: AE forwarding options not found and not
created
RPD_KRT_Q_RETRIES: Route Update: No buffer space available
RPD_KRT_Q_RETRIES: kqp 0x330793b0: op change queue low-change table inet.0
attempts 10 91.x.x.0/24 -> {103.x.x.61}=>{103.21.x.x}
RPD_KRT_Q_RETRIES: Route Update: No buffer space available
/kernel: rt_pfe_veto: Too many delayed route/nexthop unrefs. Op 2 err 55,
rtsm_id 5:-1, msg type 2
/kernel: rt_pfe_veto: Possible slowest client is xdpc0. States processed -
809041490. States to be processed - 832671
/kernel: KERN_ARP_ADDR_CHANGE: arp info overwritten for 59.x.x.5 from
a0:42:3f:x:x:b5 to a0:42:3f:x:x:b4
fpc0 Next-hop resolution requests from interface 466 throttled
fpc0 Next-hop resolution requests from interface 547 throttled
fpc0 Next-hop resolution requests from interface 411 throttled
My Current MX480 OS version ,
Model: mx480
Junos: 14.1R4.10
JUNOS Base OS boot [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Base OS Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Packet Forwarding Engine Support (M/T/EX Common) [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Packet Forwarding Engine Support (MX Common) [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS platform Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Runtime Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Online Documentation [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services AACL Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services Application Level Gateways [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS AppId Services [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Border Gateway Function package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services Captive Portal and Content Delivery Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services HTTP Content Management package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS IDP Services [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services Jflow Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services LL-PDF Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services MobileNext Software package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services Mobile Subscriber Service Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services NAT [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services PTSP Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services RPM [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services Stateful Firewall [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Voice Services Container package [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services Crypto [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services SSL [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Services IPSec [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS py-base-i386 [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS 64-bit Kernel Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Crypto Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS 64-bit Runtime Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
JUNOS Routing Software Suite [14.1R4.10]
It would be very much helpful if anyone please share their experience and
suggestion for resolve this .
Regards / Jahangir
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] MX104 Limitations
Hi I'm also using MX 104 in my core network with two full BGP feed and some IX route which working fine . On Friday, July 10, 2015 3:41 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: On 9/Jul/15 17:57, Saku Ytti wrote: It's standard C15/C16 which is temperature enchanced (120c) version of standard C13/C14. Lot of vendors are doing that these days, I'd like to understand why. Is there some new recommendation for fire safety or what has triggered the change. We're seeing the same on the ME1200 as well. A little annoying, but manageable. Mark. ___ 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] Problem to insert rule into IDP
Dear friend: Wishes all are fine.I am facing some problem on my IDP to insert rule, here the details information : Platform: NS-IDP-200 Managed OS version: IDP4.0 Running OS Version: IDP4.0.93787 NSM Version: 2012.1R2 Problem description: After fresh installing NSM I can push configuration to IDP without any problem but next time when I edit or insert any new rule and try to push configuration in to IDP it shows Error Code: Error Text: Exception caught during update device: null Error Details: java.lang.NullPointerException it would be nice any one give me suggestion to resolve this issue ? Thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Problem to test VPLS between two Site
Hi ,
Wishes all are fine.
I am getting problem about testing of VPLS service (BGP and LDP based )
between two router and my VPLS tunnel is up but i can not reach local LAN.
i am little bit confused about testing between PC. May i need to connect direct
PC on ge-1/1/9 for test or need to connect switch or router on both router's
ge-1/1/9 interface for test ?
it would be nice please check my bellow configuration for further assistance
and how test my VPLS in both end ?
Here my Configuration:
## AGG-Router-1
ge-1/1/0 {
description with_MX-_ge-1/1/0;
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 103.x.x.33/30; /// p2p between two router
}
family mpls;
}
ge-1/1/9 {
encapsulation ethernet-vpls; // At present Local PC for test
unit 0 {
family vpls;
}
protocols {
mpls {
interface all;
}
routing-options {
rib inet.3 {
static {
route 103.x.x.34/32 next-table inet.0;
}
}
autonomous-system 58xxx;
}
group vpls-ge {
type internal;
local-address 103.x.x.33;
family l2vpn {
signaling;
}
neighbor 103.x.x.34;
}
ldp {
interface ge-1/1/0.0;
interface lo0.0;
}
community grn-com members target:1:1;
routing-instances {
green {
instance-type vpls;
interface ge-1/1/9.0;
route-distinguisher 103.x.x.33:33;
vrf-target target:1:1;
protocols {
vpls {
site-range 10;
no-tunnel-services;
site greenPE1 {
site-identifier 1;
}
}
}
}
}
## AGG-Router-2 ##
ge-1/1/0 {
description with_MX_ge-1/1/0;
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 103.x.x.34/30; /// p2p between two router
}
family mpls;
}
ge-1/1/9 {
encapsulation ethernet-vpls; // At present Local PC for test
unit 0 {
family vpls;
}
routing-options {
rib inet.3 {
static {
route 103.x.x.33/32 next-table inet.0;
}
}
autonomous-system 58xxx;
}
protocols {
mpls {
interface all;
}
group vpls-ge {
type internal;
local-address 103.x.x.34;
family l2vpn {
signaling;
}
neighbor 103.x.x.33;
}
ldp {
interface ge-1/1/0.0;
interface lo0.0;
}
}
community grn-com members target:1:1;
}
routing-instances {
green {
instance-type vpls;
interface ge-1/1/9.0;
route-distinguisher 103.x.x.34:34;
vrf-target target:1:1;
protocols {
vpls {
site-range 10;
no-tunnel-services;
site greenPE2 {
site-identifier 2;
}
}
}
}
}
Agg-Router-1 # show vpls connections
Instance: green
Local site: greenPE1 (1)
connection-site Type St Time last up # Up trans
2 rmt Up Jul 16 09:11:31 2013 1
Remote PE: 103.x.x.34, Negotiated control-word: No
Incoming label: 89, Outgoing label: 800016
Local interface: vt-1/0/10.1049858, Status: Up, Encapsulation: VPLS
Description: Intf - vpls green local site 1 remote site 2
AGG-01# run show interfaces vt* terse
Interface Admin Link Proto Local Remote
vt-1/0/10 up up
vt-1/1/10 up up
vt-1/1/10.1048832 up up vpls
AGG-01 # run show vpls statistics
VPLS statistics:
Instance: green
Local interface: ge-1/1/9.0, Index: 333
Broadcast packets: 1101
Broadcast bytes : 83916
Multicast packets: 1278
Multicast bytes : 111627
Flooded packets : 0
Flooded bytes : 0
Unicast packets : 0
Unicast bytes : 0
Current MAC count: 1 (Limit 1024)
Local interface: vt-1/1/10.1049090, Index: 334
Remote PE: 103.x.x.34
Broadcast packets: 0
Broadcast bytes : 0
Multicast packets: 0
Multicast bytes : 0
Flooded packets : 0
Flooded bytes : 0
Unicast packets : 0
Unicast bytes : 0
Current MAC count: 0
it would be nice please suggest based on this config how to test this layer 2
vpn using PC?
Regards
Jahangir Hossain
Re: [j-nsp] Need your experience about Juniper Virtual router in MX-10
Hi sthaug ; yes seems me complected but i want to do this for backup my core and aggregation Vice versa. thanks jahangir - Original Message - From: sth...@nethelp.no sth...@nethelp.no To: jrjahan...@yahoo.com Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 1:14 PM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Need your experience about Juniper Virtual router in MX-10 I have two routers one is Core and other is Aggregation.Now I have two full BGP route from my upstream provider which handling 1 Gbps throughput. So I have planned to make virtual router within each router for backup purpose. For example.In core router, I want to configure Virtual router as aggregation and in Aggregation router, in want to configure virtual router as Core. That sounds like an unnecessarily complicated way of solving a problem. What is it you really want to achieve here? Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Need your experience about Juniper Virtual router in MX-10
Dear Honorable member: Wishes all are fine. I need your experience and suggestion about Virtual router in juniper MX10 router. I have two routers one is Core and other is Aggregation.Now I have two full BGP route from my upstream provider which handling 1 Gbps throughput. So I have planned to make virtual router within each router for backup purpose. For example.In core router, I want to configure Virtual router as aggregation and in Aggregation router, in want to configure virtual router as Core. It would be nice please put comment about Virtual router experience. Thanks Jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] About MIC-3D-40C30C 12-10C48 Configuration
Dear Honorable member: Wishes all are fine. I have MIC-3D-40C30C 12-10C48 PIC. i want to configuration one of the port of this PIC for STM4. For this reason , Can you any one inform the basic configuration of Sonet interface for STM4 in juniper MX router Thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] About Juniper Router SNMP into Cacti
Dear friend : Wishes all are fine. I am getting problem while i add my juniper MX router into Cacti Server. When i add juniper router into cacti , i am not getting information of this service. After checking deeply , i found juniper that may be juniper router MIBs or template not install into cacti server by default cacti installation. it would be nice can you please share your experience and suggestion how to add juniper router or device into Cacti server ? Thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] About Juniper IDP 8200 OS update
Dear friend; Wishes all are fine. I need your suggestion about update of Juniper IDP 8200 OS. My current sensor versions is : [root@localhost ~]# cat /usr/idp/device/doc/VERSION 4.2.112811 And want to update sensor_5_1r3.iso I burn this iso into usb or cdrom and try to install then get a message as like “unable to find Kicstart file “ Can anyone inform or suggest me what is reason for this or this and how I can resolve this problem? Thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper IDP 8200 OS update
Thnaks a lot atilf for your valued information. From: Atif Saleem malik.atif.sal...@gmail.com To: Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Monday, October 1, 2012 9:28 AM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper IDP 8200 OS update Hi Jahangir, I recently up-graded the IDP OS to 5.1r3 and it did up-grade without any problem. But I used the OS file with shell script (.sh file) as shown below instead of .iso file. You can download it from Juniper website (I suppose you are Juniper partner or customer and have access to download as well as to KB) as it is easy and recommended. sensor_5_1r3.sh You need to make sure that you transfer the above file to /tmp of the IDP after doing cheksum and by using either WinScp or FTP in binary mode or file gets corrupted while copying and gives error while up-grading. You can google how to transfer/copy files using WinScp/FTP in binary mode. After up-grade to 5.1r3 it looked like below. IDP01 ~]# scio getsystem Product Name: NS-IDP-8200 Serial Number: xx Software Version: 5.1.139197 IDP Mode: transparent HA Mode: Enabled Detector Version: 5.1.110110809 Software License: Permanent Software Expiration Date: never Let me give you the steps to up-grade as well, just as a reference. 1. When you transfer the .sh file to the IDP via WinScp make sure that in TRANSFER SETTING you make it BINARY. We were facing the error of md5 checksum. We resolved it by the following KB. http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=contentid=KB22668actp=searchviewlocale=en_USsearchid=1346704354266 2. Open the CLI either SSH (the device may lose connection during the reboot) or Console access (console is much better option). 3. Run the command # sh sensor_5_1r3.sh This starts the upgrade process after which it would be rebooted and may take up to 30 minutes. In case you are have opened an SSH connection, you may initiate a continuous ping to the device so as to when the device comes up. 4. After the upgrade, open the ACM and then click on ACM-- View/Apply Current configuration and apply these changes. To run the ACM do https access to the device. https://sensorIPaddress On the ACM, click save and apply configuration. Refer to release notes of 5.1R3 http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/idp5.1/information-products/topic-collections/idp-5-1-r3-release-notes.pdf 4. Open up the NSM right-click the device and Adjust OS version If you are using NSM and managing the IDP from NSM then NSM version needs to be compatible with 5.1R3. Also, if you are using a very old detector engine version then you may need to update the detector engine. Please refer to KB9773 How to update the detector version on IDP. The link for the same is as follows: http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=contentid=KB9773actp=searchviewlocale=en_USsearchid=1336101017378 Best of luck! Atif On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear friend; Wishes all are fine. I need your suggestion about update of Juniper IDP 8200 OS. My current sensor versions is : [root@localhost ~]# cat /usr/idp/device/doc/VERSION 4.2.112811 And want to update sensor_5_1r3.iso I burn this iso into usb or cdrom and try to install then get a message as like “unable to find Kicstart file “ Can anyone inform or suggest me what is reason for this or this and how I can resolve this problem? Thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp -- Atif ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] About MPLS ingress router issue
Dear friend: Wishes all are fine. i want to know some technologies about juniper ingress router as per my design. I have 5 router as per diagram into my core network... i have 2 RSVP LSP from ingress router to egress router named rsvp lsp1 and rsvp lsp2 for load balancing to reach my destination network aslike 192.168.33.0/24,192.168.34.0/24 for loadbalancing and working fine. 192.168.33.0/24 prefix go through router 1 rsvp lsp1 192.168.34.0/24 prefix go through router 2 rsvp lsp2 and other path going though router 3 unused and working fine. My question is, Can i get same results without configure RSVP LSP path into ingress router ? if yes what is option or technologies ? thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
Thanks Doug for your information.
- Original Message -
From: Doug Hanks dha...@juniper.net
To: Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
This should walk you through most of your questions:
http://www.juniper.net/us/en/community/junos/training-certification/day-one
/fundamentals-series/securing-routing-engine/
Doug
On 8/22/12 8:35 PM, Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com wrote:
Dear all friend:
Wishes all are fine.
I quit new in juniper OS platform . i need some information about juniper
Control Plan Policy (CoPP). i read the RFC 6192 of Protect Router
Control Plane which is:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6192#appendix-A.2
After reading the RFC 6192 i have a little query as like,In cisco router
we put input policy on control plan.
as like;
control-plane service-policy input COPPBut in Juniper router we put input
policy into loopback interface according to this RFC .
Here this is:
interfaces { lo0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }Based on my question is, how
juniper router loopback interface control all router control plan ? or i
need to put this input filter policy individually on different
interfaces as like:
interfaces{ em0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }
interfaces { em1 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }
it would be nice for me can anyone please confirm me about this
configuration .
Thanks
Jahangir Hossain
___
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] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
Thanks Apurva for your information.
From: apurva modh modh.apu...@gmail.com
To: Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
All the Routing engine bound traffic into Juniper is handled through the
loopback interface. So if you apply the input direction filter on the loopback
interface, it would simulate the exact behavior of the control plane filter of
cisco. You dont need to apply protect routing-engine filter to physical
interfaces.
Hope this solves your query.
Regards,
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Dear all friend:
Wishes all are fine.
I quit new in juniper OS platform . i need some information about juniper
Control Plan Policy (CoPP). i read the RFC 6192 of Protect Router Control
Plane which is:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6192#appendix-A.2
After reading the RFC 6192 i have a little query as like,In cisco router we
put input policy on control plan.
as like;
control-plane service-policy input COPPBut in Juniper router we put input
policy into loopback interface according to this RFC .
Here this is:
interfaces { lo0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }Based on my question is, how
juniper router loopback interface control all router control plan ? or i need
to put this input filter policy individually on different
interfaces as like:
interfaces{ em0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }
interfaces { em1 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }
it would be nice for me can anyone please confirm me about this configuration .
Thanks
Jahangir Hossain
___
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] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
Dear all friend:
Wishes all are fine.
I quit new in juniper OS platform . i need some information about juniper
Control Plan Policy (CoPP). i read the RFC 6192 of Protect Router Control
Plane which is:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6192#appendix-A.2
After reading the RFC 6192 i have a little query as like,In cisco router we
put input policy on control plan.
as like;
control-plane service-policy input COPPBut in Juniper router we put input
policy into loopback interface according to this RFC .
Here this is:
interfaces { lo0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }Based on my question is, how
juniper router loopback interface control all router control plan ? or i need
to put this input filter policy individually on different
interfaces as like:
interfaces{ em0 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }
interfaces { em1 { unit 0 { family inet { filter input
protect-router-control-plane; }
it would be nice for me can anyone please confirm me about this configuration .
Thanks
Jahangir Hossain
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance
Thanks again to all of valued member for putting valued information. From: Doug Hanks dha...@juniper.net To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net; Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 11:00 PM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance The MX5 scaling is identical to the MX80. The only difference is that the MX5 restricts the physical port usage to MIC0. 3,000,000 IPv4 prefixes in the RIB. 1,000,000 IPv4 unicast in the FIB. Thank you, -- Doug Hanks - JNCIE-ENT #213, JNCIE-SP #875 Sr. Systems Engineer Juniper Networks On 4/23/12 2:44 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote: On (2012-04-22 23:52 -0700), Md. Jahangir Hossain wrote: In some of forum i found 1.6million but in juniper site i can not found this information. This is certainly possible and will scale further, depending of course what other things are populated in RLDRAM. Giving exact answer might prove difficult. More than likely you'll find control-plane scaling to be insufficient before you'll be bothered by RDLRAM being filled. -- ++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] About Juniper MX10 router performance
Thanks jonathan to reach you again. Actually i need to confirmation how many BGP routes this model can handle. In some of forum i found 1.6million but in juniper site i can not found this information. So i am a little bit confused that way i need to know the practical information if any one used this product related to this service. thanks jahangir From: Jonathan Lassoff j...@thejof.com To: Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear valued member: Wishes all are fine. i need suggestion from you about Juniper MX10 router performance who already implement this. i want to buy this router for IP Transit provider where i received all global routes . it would be nice please put your valued suggestion about this issue . Jahangir -- we spoke briefly about this on NANOG just now as well. Do you have a specific question about the MX10? What is it that you're trying to accomplish? --j ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance
Thanks to all for putting your valued information. From: Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org To: 'Md. Jahangir Hossain' jrjahan...@yahoo.com; 'Jonathan Lassoff' j...@thejof.com Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 8:30 PM Subject: RE: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance Sorry - I thought it was M10i you were talking about... On the MX80 side this it the largest we have at the moment is around 650k BGP routes. Paul -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart Sent: April-23-12 6:03 AM To: 'Md. Jahangir Hossain'; 'Jonathan Lassoff' Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance The 1.6 million sounds around right but have nothing to confirm it. The largest table we have running on an M10i looks like this: Table Tot Paths Act Paths Suppressed History Damp State Pending inet.0 549751 410074 0 0 0 0 bgp.l3vpn.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bgp.l2vpn.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 inet6.0 65318 63375 0 0 0 0 Not sure if that helps or not - memory consumption sits around 50% That's from an M10i running RE850 cards... Paul -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Md. Jahangir Hossain Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 2:53 AM To: Jonathan Lassoff Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance Thanks jonathan to reach you again. Actually i need to confirmation how many BGP routes this model can handle. In some of forum i found 1.6million but in juniper site i can not found this information. So i am a little bit confused that way i need to know the practical information if any one used this product related to this service. thanks jahangir From: Jonathan Lassoff j...@thejof.com To: Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Md. Jahangir Hossain jrjahan...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear valued member: Wishes all are fine. i need suggestion from you about Juniper MX10 router performance who already implement this. i want to buy this router for IP Transit provider where i received all global routes . it would be nice please put your valued suggestion about this issue . Jahangir -- we spoke briefly about this on NANOG just now as well. Do you have a specific question about the MX10? What is it that you're trying to accomplish? --j ___ 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
[j-nsp] About Juniper MX10 router performance
Dear valued member: Wishes all are fine. i need suggestion from you about Juniper MX10 router performance who already implement this. i want to buy this router for IP Transit provider where i received all global routes . it would be nice please put your valued suggestion about this issue . thanks jahangir ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
