Re: [j-nsp] Juniper SA appliance - IPSec tunneling

2008-10-28 Thread George Guzic
Juniper doesn't support IPSEC on their SA devices. You'll need the SSG's for that. GL George -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ivan c Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 7:54 PM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] Juniper SA

[j-nsp] Cisco Translation

2008-10-28 Thread Juan C. Crespo R.
Dears Could anyone of you sendme a translation about the configuration below from Cisco to Junos? ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 null 0 254 ! This is for generate the network ip prefix-list BGP-OUT seq 10 permit 192.168.0.0/24 route-map BGP-OUT match ip prefix-list BGP-OUT set

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco Translation

2008-10-28 Thread Truman Boyes
Hi Juan, Something like this should point you in the right direction: [edit logical-routers dixie] [EMAIL PROTECTED] show protocols { bgp { group ebgp { export BGP-OUT; neighbor 1.1.1.1 { peer-as 4000; local-as 3000;

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco Translation

2008-10-28 Thread Erdem Sener
Hi Juan, On top of Truman's suggestion, I'd say you might want to think about different 'default' behaviors between IOS and JUNOS; such as sending/receiving communities. Unlike IOS, JUNOS will send the community information on bgp updates by default, so if you'd like to 'keep your communities to

[j-nsp] SONET/SDH OC48/STM16 (Multi-Rate) PIC

2008-10-28 Thread Marlon Duksa
Does anyone know if this PIC supports channelization down to VC-4 - 16x VC4 (STM-1) channels.Thanks, Marlon ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco Translation

2008-10-28 Thread Andraz Sraka
re On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 09:55 -0430, Juan C. Crespo R. wrote: Could anyone of you sendme a translation about the configuration below from Cisco to Junos? See below .. just an example. ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 null 0 254 ! This is for generate the network set routing-options

Re: [j-nsp] SONET/SDH OC48/STM16 (Multi-Rate) PIC

2008-10-28 Thread Nitzan Tzelniker
As far as I know you can use it as one STM-1 port but you can't use the *non-concatenated feature to cut it to 16 * STM1 but you can cut it to 4 * STM4 Nitzan * On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 20:46, Marlon Duksa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know if this PIC supports channelization down to

Re: [j-nsp] IRB and 9.2 @MX

2008-10-28 Thread Richard A Steenbergen
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 08:28:38AM +0100, Nicolas DEFFAYET wrote: I'm currently running 9.2 and IRB interfaces on MX work fine for me. I have only unicast traffic. 9.2R2.15 have broken interface counters (CLI and SNMP) on input direction for all physical interfaces in bridge-domains.

Re: [j-nsp] TCP SYN attack causing BGP peer down?

2008-10-28 Thread Ying Zhang
The attack was through the router not against the router. The router has many BGP peers. And only the peer it went through was dropped. The CPU was running almost idle during the attack. Thanks. - Original Message - From: Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] TCP SYN attack causing BGP peer down?

2008-10-28 Thread Richard A Steenbergen
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:31:29AM -0700, ying zhang wrote: ? We experienced a TCP SYN attack from internet today (about 350,000 pps). Our internet pipe with ISP is 300Mb/s. The attack caused our BGP peer to be tear down. Just wondering why this could happen if our pipe is not fully

Re: [j-nsp] TCP SYN attack causing BGP peer down?

2008-10-28 Thread Scott Weeks
- Original Message - From: Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We experienced a TCP SYN attack from internet today (about 350,000 pps). Our internet pipe with ISP is 300Mb/s. The attack caused our BGP peer to be tear down. Just wondering why this could

Re: [j-nsp] TCP SYN attack causing BGP peer down?

2008-10-28 Thread Scott Weeks
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mark Tinka [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wednesday 29 October 2008 04:05:11 Scott Weeks wrote: Could've it sent the CPU of the upstream router through the roof? If they are using a software-based router and it was overloaded, yes - otherwise, the attack would have

Re: [j-nsp] TCP SYN attack causing BGP peer down?

2008-10-28 Thread Mark Tinka
On Wednesday 29 October 2008 04:05:11 Scott Weeks wrote: Could've it sent the CPU of the upstream router through the roof? If they are using a software-based router and it was overloaded, yes - otherwise, the attack would have terminated at their router. Cheers, Mark. signature.asc

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper SA appliance - IPSec tunneling

2008-10-28 Thread Ivan c
Further to that query, can anyone suggest an appliance that fulfils both client-less SSL and IPSec VPN modes? thanks Ivan On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 9:54 PM, George Guzic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Juniper doesn't support IPSEC on their SA devices. You'll need the SSG's for that. GL George

Re: [j-nsp] J-Series Compact Flash

2008-10-28 Thread Phil Dyer
Matt Stevens wrote: Just wondering what everyone else is using for Compact Flash in the J-Series. I've been using the SanDisk SDCFB-1024-A10 1GB cards that are on the Juniper compatibility list, but I've had at least two routers start complaining about corruption on the flash. I have