Hi folks,
How sensitive/accurate is the show interface statistics in capturing the real
time flow of traffic?
When monitoring the OC-192 interface the peak utilization on the interface and
MRTG was showing 9.2Gbps. But, there were packet losses clocking by second!
Is this because the int
> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:40:10 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Igor Gashinsky
> Sender: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
>
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Stefan Fouant wrote:
>
> :: On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Richard A Steenbergen
> wrote:
> ::
> :: I thought this was the whole idea behind the introdu
what kind of routing issue this is?
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of Shane Ronan
Sent: Sat 9/26/2009 23:54
To: juniper-nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] EX4200 and Broadcom NICs on Linux Server
Has any else experienced routing issues with Broadcom NICS on a L
Has any else experienced routing issues with Broadcom NICS on a Linux
Server connected to an EX4200?
Shane
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Ups, I really missed the number of BGP routes limitation for SRX240. Sorry.
However 300K stated in the datasheet is not a hard limit for J series. It is
only a number well known to be supported with no issues. I wonder if this is
different for SRX.
But anyway BGP RR license is only available for
Hi 陈江,
You're right, this should be almost always done if you run several external
peers with fullview, but this code only switches the box into router
context. It doesn't make fwdd to free the memory. The router I used to show
the fwdd memory consumption is also given this piece of config.
I hea
if you running flow based JUNOS , you could try this knob to turn it into
packet based mode:
security {
forwarding-options {
family {
mpls {
mode packet-based;
}
}
}
}
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Pavel Lunin wrote:
> 2009/9/24 Chris Kawchuk
>
> Y
Hi Andree,
Normally I would say you might be missing the "routing-options route-record"
feature, give it a try. But the following page seems quite negative about it:
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos94/swconfig-routing/overview_1.html
Having the "route-record" feature under th
Sorry to reply to myself, but I meant outperform J series, in the same
factor-size and price range.
2009/9/26 Gregory Agerba
> Hi Pavel,
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> Based on factsheets the J series outperform BGP capabilities of the SRX
> series. The only out that outperform in SRX is the 650
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for your input.
Based on factsheets the J series outperform BGP capabilities of the SRX
series. The only out that outperform in SRX is the 650 which looks like a
real good deal (thanks for pointing it out to me!).
Nice weekend.
- Gregory
2009/9/26 Pavel Lunin plu...@senetsy.ru
2009/9/24 Chris Kawchuk
Yep. 30 ACL's with no issues (assuming straightforward things). Full BGP
> Tables, OSPF area 0.0.0.0 inside, QoS, IPSEC.
I'd warn you guys of running peers with full BGP on J series with 1 Gig of
RAM. It was not a problem till 9.4. But since 9.4 JUNOS for J-series is flo
11 matches
Mail list logo
