Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version
Hi, On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:27:23AM +1000, Luca Salvatore wrote: > Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is > 12.2r2.5 > But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. > > Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any > horror stories. > I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer > 2 aggregation type switch. that depends on various factors. at this point my recommendation is to consult your Reseller, PM, SE or JTAC and explain your usecase so they can match your usecase against known PRs and recommend the best-fit for you. n short: there currently is no release which fits all. -mc ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version
I believe 12.3R2 still has the bug where the syslog fills up with erroneous messages about one or both of the power supplies being removed (12.3R1 complains about the fan tray AND the power supplies). This is finally put to bed in 12.3R3 Cheers, Ben On 24/07/2013, at 7:56 PM, Pierre-Yves Maunier wrote: > I'll be deploying a couple of EX4550 doing mainly L3/MPLS stuff (ospf, > bgp, l3vpn, l2circuit) and I'm going to roll out 12.3R3.4. > > Generally I prefer using at least an R3 release and as Juniper > promised me that 12.3 would be 'the next 11.4' then I'm going for this > one. > > 2013/7/24 Luca Salvatore : >> Hi All, >> >> Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is >> 12.2r2.5 >> But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. >> >> Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any >> horror stories. >> I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer >> 2 aggregation type switch. >> >> 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] EX4550 version
I'd like to know more about LAG+ECMP as well. You can't really use LAG+ECMP on EX3300 for instance. If you have 2x10G LAG uplink on which you're doing ECMP. Traffic will eventually be load balanced over the 2 LAGs thanks to ECMP but traffic will not be load balanced within the LAG members. 2013/7/24 Phil Bedard : > This is unrelated somewhat, but what are the current LAG member limits > as well as ECMP limits? Any restrictions on LAG+ECMP? > > phil From: Sam > Sent: 7/24/2013 8:46 > To: Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS) > Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version > Hi Farid, > > From an old case I had open with Juniper: > >>The EX4550 has an ARP table of maximum 8k entries. >> These entries are tracked in the kernel through something called tokens. >> Each ARP entry is a token. >> >> Because we have only 8k tokens available, from here we have the maximum >> number of ARP entries. >> >> However, because of how the chipset of EX4550 is designed, the MPLS LSPs are >> also making use of the same tokens. >> But each MPLS LSP is using 8 tokens. Therefore, 1000 LSPs would use all >> tokens and no ARP can be learned. >> >> The token usage is scaled up by the number of ECMP next-hops. So 1 LSP with >> 4 ECMP next-hops will take 1*8*4=32 tokens. > > -- > sam > > > On 24 Jul 2013, at 11:28, "Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS)" > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Can you clarify the MPLS limits ? >> >> Thx >> >> ----- Message d'origine - >> De : Sam [mailto:sam...@arahant.net] >> Envoyé : Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:39 AM >> À : Luca Salvatore >> Cc : juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >> Objet : Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version >> >> I used the 12.3R2.5 for quite some time now without any issue. The platform >> has its limitations (especially related to how MPLS is handled), but if >> you're just using it for L2 or basic L3 it works just fine. >> >> -- >> sam >> >> On 24 Jul 2013, at 03:27, Luca Salvatore wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is >>> 12.2r2.5 >>> But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. >>> >>> Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any >>> horror stories. >>> I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple >>> layer 2 aggregation type switch. >>> >>> 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 > > ___ > 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] EX4550 version
I assume that aggregating multiple interfaces would downscale the tokens usage, as a 4x10GE bundle would use just 8 tokens rather than 32 of 4 equal cost paths. Limits are in the data-sheet: - Number of LAGs supported: 64 - Maximum number of ports per LAG: 8 I'd expect this value to be the same for the number of ECMP paths. -- sam On 24 Jul 2013, at 15:07, Phil Bedard wrote: > This is unrelated somewhat, but what are the current LAG member limits > as well as ECMP limits? Any restrictions on LAG+ECMP? > > phil From: Sam > Sent: 7/24/2013 8:46 > To: Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS) > Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version > Hi Farid, > > From an old case I had open with Juniper: > >> The EX4550 has an ARP table of maximum 8k entries. >> These entries are tracked in the kernel through something called tokens. >> Each ARP entry is a token. >> >> Because we have only 8k tokens available, from here we have the maximum >> number of ARP entries. >> >> However, because of how the chipset of EX4550 is designed, the MPLS LSPs are >> also making use of the same tokens. >> But each MPLS LSP is using 8 tokens. Therefore, 1000 LSPs would use all >> tokens and no ARP can be learned. >> >> The token usage is scaled up by the number of ECMP next-hops. So 1 LSP with >> 4 ECMP next-hops will take 1*8*4=32 tokens. > > -- > sam > > > On 24 Jul 2013, at 11:28, "Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS)" > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Can you clarify the MPLS limits ? >> >> Thx >> >> - Message d'origine - >> De : Sam [mailto:sam...@arahant.net] >> Envoyé : Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:39 AM >> À : Luca Salvatore >> Cc : juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >> Objet : Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version >> >> I used the 12.3R2.5 for quite some time now without any issue. The platform >> has its limitations (especially related to how MPLS is handled), but if >> you're just using it for L2 or basic L3 it works just fine. >> >> -- >> sam >> >> On 24 Jul 2013, at 03:27, Luca Salvatore wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is >>> 12.2r2.5 >>> But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. >>> >>> Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any >>> horror stories. >>> I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple >>> layer 2 aggregation type switch. >>> >>> 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] EX4550 version
This is unrelated somewhat, but what are the current LAG member limits as well as ECMP limits? Any restrictions on LAG+ECMP? phil From: Sam Sent: 7/24/2013 8:46 To: Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS) Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version Hi Farid, >From an old case I had open with Juniper: >The EX4550 has an ARP table of maximum 8k entries. > These entries are tracked in the kernel through something called tokens. > Each ARP entry is a token. > > Because we have only 8k tokens available, from here we have the maximum > number of ARP entries. > > However, because of how the chipset of EX4550 is designed, the MPLS LSPs are > also making use of the same tokens. > But each MPLS LSP is using 8 tokens. Therefore, 1000 LSPs would use all > tokens and no ARP can be learned. > > The token usage is scaled up by the number of ECMP next-hops. So 1 LSP with 4 > ECMP next-hops will take 1*8*4=32 tokens. -- sam On 24 Jul 2013, at 11:28, "Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS)" wrote: > Hello, > > Can you clarify the MPLS limits ? > > Thx > > - Message d'origine - > De : Sam [mailto:sam...@arahant.net] > Envoyé : Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:39 AM > À : Luca Salvatore > Cc : juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Objet : Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version > > I used the 12.3R2.5 for quite some time now without any issue. The platform > has its limitations (especially related to how MPLS is handled), but if > you're just using it for L2 or basic L3 it works just fine. > > -- > sam > > On 24 Jul 2013, at 03:27, Luca Salvatore wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is >> 12.2r2.5 >> But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. >> >> Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any >> horror stories. >> I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer >> 2 aggregation type switch. >> >> 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version
Hi Farid, >From an old case I had open with Juniper: >The EX4550 has an ARP table of maximum 8k entries. > These entries are tracked in the kernel through something called tokens. > Each ARP entry is a token. > > Because we have only 8k tokens available, from here we have the maximum > number of ARP entries. > > However, because of how the chipset of EX4550 is designed, the MPLS LSPs are > also making use of the same tokens. > But each MPLS LSP is using 8 tokens. Therefore, 1000 LSPs would use all > tokens and no ARP can be learned. > > The token usage is scaled up by the number of ECMP next-hops. So 1 LSP with 4 > ECMP next-hops will take 1*8*4=32 tokens. -- sam On 24 Jul 2013, at 11:28, "Bouzemarene, Farid (ATS)" wrote: > Hello, > > Can you clarify the MPLS limits ? > > Thx > > - Message d'origine - > De : Sam [mailto:sam...@arahant.net] > Envoyé : Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:39 AM > À : Luca Salvatore > Cc : juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Objet : Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version > > I used the 12.3R2.5 for quite some time now without any issue. The platform > has its limitations (especially related to how MPLS is handled), but if > you're just using it for L2 or basic L3 it works just fine. > > -- > sam > > On 24 Jul 2013, at 03:27, Luca Salvatore wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is >> 12.2r2.5 >> But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. >> >> Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any >> horror stories. >> I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer >> 2 aggregation type switch. >> >> 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] EX4550 version
There was a bug in 12.2R3 which cause VC cable not to forward traffic should be fixed in R4 (look in the list archive for the PSN ) Now I am working with 12.2R3 and R4 without VC Nitzan On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Nick Kritsky wrote: > I have several running 12.2R1.8, some of them as pure L2 aggregation > switches, some of them doing basic L3 including OSPF, VRRP. No VC. > No issues found so far. > > nick > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Luca Salvatore wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version > is > > 12.2r2.5 > > But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. > > > > Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any > > horror stories. > > I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple > > layer 2 aggregation type switch. > > > > 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] EX4550 version
I'll be deploying a couple of EX4550 doing mainly L3/MPLS stuff (ospf, bgp, l3vpn, l2circuit) and I'm going to roll out 12.3R3.4. Generally I prefer using at least an R3 release and as Juniper promised me that 12.3 would be 'the next 11.4' then I'm going for this one. 2013/7/24 Luca Salvatore : > Hi All, > > Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is > 12.2r2.5 > But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. > > Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any > horror stories. > I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer > 2 aggregation type switch. > > 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] EX4550 version
I used the 12.3R2.5 for quite some time now without any issue. The platform has its limitations (especially related to how MPLS is handled), but if you're just using it for L2 or basic L3 it works just fine. -- sam On 24 Jul 2013, at 03:27, Luca Salvatore wrote: > Hi All, > > Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is > 12.2r2.5 > But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. > > Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any > horror stories. > I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer > 2 aggregation type switch. > > 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] EX4550 version
I have several running 12.2R1.8, some of them as pure L2 aggregation switches, some of them doing basic L3 including OSPF, VRRP. No VC. No issues found so far. nick On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Luca Salvatore wrote: > Hi All, > > Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is > 12.2r2.5 > But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. > > Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any > horror stories. > I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple > layer 2 aggregation type switch. > > 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] EX4550 version
On Wednesday, July 24, 2013 06:56:03 AM Ben Dale wrote: > I pulled one out of the box the other day and whatever it > shipped with wouldn't bring up 10G DAC cables (Cisco > branded) and the backlight on the LCD panel didn't work > (?!!) until I upgraded it (12.3R3), which fixed both > issues. Interesting. I didn't have the LCD panel issue. We'll probably be looking to upgrade next year, when we roll out new kit and take advantage of (what I hope will be) newer/stable code at the time. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version
I pulled one out of the box the other day and whatever it shipped with wouldn't bring up 10G DAC cables (Cisco branded) and the backlight on the LCD panel didn't work (?!!) until I upgraded it (12.3R3), which fixed both issues. On 24/07/2013, at 2:49 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > On Wednesday, July 24, 2013 03:27:23 AM Luca Salvatore > wrote: > >> Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current >> recommended version is 12.2r2.5 But I just saw tha the >> 12.2 train is up release 5.3. >> >> Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and >> if you have any horror stories. I'm not doing VC with >> these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer 2 >> aggregation type switch. > > We've been running ours since January this year, and back > then, only 12.2R2.4 was available for the chassis. > > Nothing major on our end, just pure Layer 2 aggregation in > the core. Haven't seen any problems yet, but our deployment > isn't that interesting. I use them mostly for the port > speed. > > 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
Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 version
On Wednesday, July 24, 2013 03:27:23 AM Luca Salvatore wrote: > Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current > recommended version is 12.2r2.5 But I just saw tha the > 12.2 train is up release 5.3. > > Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and > if you have any horror stories. I'm not doing VC with > these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer 2 > aggregation type switch. We've been running ours since January this year, and back then, only 12.2R2.4 was available for the chassis. Nothing major on our end, just pure Layer 2 aggregation in the core. Haven't seen any problems yet, but our deployment isn't that interesting. I use them mostly for the port speed. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] EX4550 version
Hi All, Just got a couple of new EX4550 switches... current recommended version is 12.2r2.5 But I just saw tha the 12.2 train is up release 5.3. Just wondering what the rest of you guys are running and if you have any horror stories. I'm not doing VC with these guys, they are going to be a pretty simple layer 2 aggregation type switch. Thanks. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
