[j-nsp] DHCP static bindings on J2320

2009-07-16 Thread Alexander Shikoff
Hello, I'm using J2320 (JunOS 9.5R1.8) as a router in office network with ~10 VLANs. DHCP works good on it but there is confusing issue with DHCP static bindings. I've configured binding: minot...@cr1-kur.ki show configuration system services dhcp static-binding 00:40:01:27:e2:87 fixed-address

Re: [j-nsp] DHCP static bindings on J2320

2009-07-16 Thread Alexander Shikoff
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 06:08:03PM +0500, mas...@nexlinx.net.pk wrote: the services router supports dhcp client requests received on fast ethernet interfaces only. dhcp is not supported on interfaces that are part of a virtual private network (vpn). by the way there is already a thread on

Re: [j-nsp] DHCP static bindings on J2320

2009-07-16 Thread masood
that said, did you know that Juniper JTAC is the only way to resolve this issue :) Regards, Masood On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 06:08:03PM +0500, mas...@nexlinx.net.pk wrote: the services router supports dhcp client requests received on fast ethernet interfaces only. dhcp is not supported on

Re: [j-nsp] MPLS RSVP

2009-07-16 Thread Mark Tinka
On Thursday 16 July 2009 07:57:03 pm Jeff Cadwallader wrote: Currently we have a small network of 3 Cisco 7206 routers running MPLS using LDP as the distribution protocol and we are replacing them with Juniper MXseries routers. Fun times ahead :-). In designing and planning the replacement

Re: [j-nsp] DHCP static bindings on J2320

2009-07-16 Thread David Sinn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've noticed the same problem on my J's too. Looks to be a uniqueness in the implementation of the DHCP server in JunOS. DHCPd under Linux and Cisco's built-in DHCP server do not exhibit the same behavior. What I've been able to track it to

Re: [j-nsp] MPLS RSVP

2009-07-16 Thread Truman Boyes
On JUNOS you can run LDP and RSVP and even run LDP tunneling inside RSVP. It all works very well in some of the largest networks in the world. Have fun, Truman Boyes On 16/07/2009, at 7:57 AM, Jeff Cadwallader wrote: I've been told that I should go ahead and configure the network