Re: [j-nsp] How to upgrade junos 5.0.0r8.1

2009-07-15 Thread George
Thanks Guys, atleast that gives a success rate guarantee of around 90%, better than some of those Vaccine drugs in the market. Cheerz On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 15:42 -0500, Tim Eberhard wrote: You configuration will remain after the upgrade/reboot. Downgrading is the same process as upgrading

Re: [j-nsp] How to upgrade junos 5.0.0r8.1

2009-07-15 Thread George
Hello again. Just to confirm the steps if they are correct: 1. download the firmware I want to upgrade to ie 5.2.0r2.0 (Do i get the zip file or the bin, or is the bin file contained in the zip file) 2. From the Juniper GUI browse and load the Image to be upgraded. 3. Once loaded reboot the

Re: [j-nsp] How to upgrade junos 5.0.0r8.1

2009-07-15 Thread Tim Eberhard
The bin file is within the ZIP. You will load the bin to the firewall. I would highly recommend against using anything but juniper.net to download your netscreen software. Never ever get your images from any where but directly from Juniper. The firewall images could contain back doors, root kits

[j-nsp] ADSL PIM on J2350 uses 85% memory

2009-07-15 Thread Leigh Porter
Hey folks, I have a J2350 running various versions of 9.x, when I put a ADSL2+ PIM into the chassis, the memory utilisation jumps to 85% from 0% with no ADSL PIM. With a simple config this jumps to 95% or so. When up the config to the desired 4 ADSl PIMs, the Gig-E interfaces sometimes vanish

Re: [j-nsp] BGP import policy not refreshing properly

2009-07-15 Thread Truman Boyes
Hi, I ran a quick test with 9.2R2.15 between two BGP peers and I see BGP metric (MED) changes take effect immediately. tbo...@brooklyn show configuration protocols bgp group test { type internal; local-address 50.50.50.1; family inet { unicast; } family inet-vpn {

Re: [j-nsp] ADSL PIM on J2350 uses 85% memory

2009-07-15 Thread Manu Chao
sorry to tell you need a memory upgrade (512 is the minimum no?) On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com wrote: Hey folks, I have a J2350 running various versions of 9.x, when I put a ADSL2+ PIM into the chassis, the memory utilisation jumps to 85% from

[j-nsp] M7i and IEEE 802.1ag OAM Connectivity-Fault Management

2009-07-15 Thread Thiago Drechsel
Hi. Does anybody know if M7i supports 802.1ag OAM?? I've gone through documentation and could not find clear information... Running JUNOS 9.0. Thanks in advance!! Thiago ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] M7i and IEEE 802.1ag OAM Connectivity-Fault Management

2009-07-15 Thread Harry Reynolds
From another thread: 802.3ah is supported on all M-series. You're right about the platforms not supporting distributed ppmd. 802.1ag cannot be supported on ABC. The i-chip CFEB upgrade to m7i/m10i will support 802.1ag. Ananth -Original Message- From:

[j-nsp] bgp multipath confusion

2009-07-15 Thread Cord MacLeod
I guess I don't fully understand how this is supposed to work. I have an ex4200 device with 4 links, 2 to each m7. Both m7s are acting as route reflectors and advertising default to the ex4200. The loopbacks are advertised with ISIS. However when I check BGP's summery and my routing

Re: [j-nsp] bgp multipath confusion

2009-07-15 Thread Truman Boyes
The route reflectors are sending the best routes. Are there different IGP costs between the 4 links? The routes will need to be equal to have them all installed as equal. There is an option for VPN routes to ignore the IGP metrics, but I assume these are standard inet. 0 routes. Truman

Re: [j-nsp] bgp multipath confusion

2009-07-15 Thread Cord MacLeod
r...@crs1.sc1 show isis route IS-IS routing table Current version: L1: 0 L2: 599 IPv4/IPv6 Routes Prefix L Version Metric Type InterfaceVia 10.0.0.4/30 2 599 20 int ge-1/0/1.0 edge2.xxx

Re: [j-nsp] BGP import policy not refreshing properly

2009-07-15 Thread Yevgeniy Voloshin
Hi Truman, *tbo...@manhattan show configuration policy-options policy-statement set-med term 1 {** from metric 0; then { metric 3; **?++ACCEPT++?** } } * * term local_pref {** then { local-preference 110; accept; } } * * term default { then