Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QinQ problem

[Abhi]

Hi Guys 


thanks i get that.

 
Regards
Abhijeet.C





From: Mark Tinka 
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc: sth...@nethelp.no; vyaaghrah-...@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QinQ problem

On Wednesday, August 31, 2011 10:29:31 PM sth...@nethelp.no 
wrote:

> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/nsp/99661
> 
> For a *switch* you normally expect VLANs to be "global"
> or "chassis wide". For a *router* you normally expect
> VLANs to be per-port/per-interface.
> 
> And then there are boxes like Cisco 7600 "routers" :-)
> 
> (Yes, I realize this is a Juniper list.)

I guess it's reasonable to discuss them as it's general 
design principle regardless of vendor.

Truth be told, the ES/ES+ line cards on the 7600 (and now 
6500) make VLAN ID's locally significant to a port on said 
line cards (scenarios may vary based on line card generation 
and number of tags used on sub-interfaces). However, those 
cards are pricey, and depending on your needs, an ASR9000 or 
MX240/480/960 may be more ideal.

Cheers,

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

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QinQ problem

[Mark Tinka]

On Wednesday, August 31, 2011 10:29:31 PM sth...@nethelp.no 
wrote:

> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/nsp/99661
> 
> For a *switch* you normally expect VLANs to be "global"
> or "chassis wide". For a *router* you normally expect
> VLANs to be per-port/per-interface.
> 
> And then there are boxes like Cisco 7600 "routers" :-)
> 
> (Yes, I realize this is a Juniper list.)

I guess it's reasonable to discuss them as it's general 
design principle regardless of vendor.

Truth be told, the ES/ES+ line cards on the 7600 (and now 
6500) make VLAN ID's locally significant to a port on said 
line cards (scenarios may vary based on line card generation 
and number of tags used on sub-interfaces). However, those 
cards are pricey, and depending on your needs, an ASR9000 or 
MX240/480/960 may be more ideal.

Cheers,

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] Juniper QinQ problem

[sthaug]

> I dont understand the differnce between Chassis wide VLAN and probably line 
> card based Vlan. Can you help me understand the same.

There are lots of discussions about this on the cisco-nsp list, due to
well known limitations of the 6500/7600 architecture. See for instance

 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/nsp/99661

For a *switch* you normally expect VLANs to be "global" or "chassis wide".
For a *router* you normally expect VLANs to be per-port/per-interface.

And then there are boxes like Cisco 7600 "routers" :-)

(Yes, I realize this is a Juniper list.)

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QinQ problem

[Abhi]

Hi Steinar

I dont understand the differnce between Chassis wide VLAN and probably line 
card based Vlan. Can you help me understand the same.
thanls

 
Regards
Abhijeet.C





From: "sth...@nethelp.no" 
To: jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QinQ problem

>      Recently, i had came cross a problem, the customer need me to configure
> the QinQ in the MX960 products, i am wondering if there anyone had the
> example of the QinQ configuration in the MX?

Do you mean QinQ (dual tagged) *termination*? Or something else? Here
is an example of a dual tagged customer (2 x 0x8100 tags) terminated on
an MX:

a...@xxx.yyy> show configuration interfaces ge-0/0/9.976
vlan-tags outer 1012 inner 300;
family inet {
    mtu 1500;
    address 10.232.46.1/30;
}

>      Does the MX can end up the vlan in the line card, just like the ES line
> card in the 7609-S?

Not sure what you're asking about here. If you're asking whether the
VLANs are global to the chassis, like normal LAN cards on a 7600, the
answer is *no*.

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

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QinQ problem

[sthaug]

>  Recently, i had came cross a problem, the customer need me to configure
> the QinQ in the MX960 products, i am wondering if there anyone had the
> example of the QinQ configuration in the MX?

Do you mean QinQ (dual tagged) *termination*? Or something else? Here
is an example of a dual tagged customer (2 x 0x8100 tags) terminated on
an MX:

a...@xxx.yyy> show configuration interfaces ge-0/0/9.976
vlan-tags outer 1012 inner 300;
family inet {
mtu 1500;
address 10.232.46.1/30;
}

>  Does the MX can end up the vlan in the line card, just like the ES line
> card in the 7609-S?

Not sure what you're asking about here. If you're asking whether the
VLANs are global to the chassis, like normal LAN cards on a 7600, the
answer is *no*.

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] Juniper QinQ problem

[许虎]

Hi,

 Recently, i had came cross a problem, the customer need me to configure
the QinQ in the MX960 products, i am wondering if there anyone had the
example of the QinQ configuration in the MX?

 Does the MX can end up the vlan in the line card, just like the ES line
card in the 7609-S?

Best regards
Have a nice day
Chuck Xu
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp