Hi Guys
while searching on the net for "Flow Based router building limitation" came
across www.anagran.com who have built the first flow based router(or may be
second after caspian).
1) Just want to know anybody has worked on this device and how effective it is.
2) Also are Juniper/Cisco plan
Excerpts from Truman Boyes's message of Tue Dec 22 20:12:34 -0800 2009:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> You can use any of your DPCs. On non-MX JUNOS routers you need to have tunnel
> pics (ie. packet that needs to be encapsulated/tunneled/etc will switch from
> PFE to PIC to PFE). MX does not require this bec
Hi Jonathan,
You can use any of your DPCs. On non-MX JUNOS routers you need to have tunnel
pics (ie. packet that needs to be encapsulated/tunneled/etc will switch from
PFE to PIC to PFE). MX does not require this because you can make the DPC
perform tunnel-services.
Once you create the tunnel
Excerpts from Truman Boyes's message of Tue Dec 22 18:25:23 -0800 2009:
> Have you enabled the tunnel-services statement at the [ edit chassis fpc
> slot-number pic pic-number] stanza?
Thanks Truman!
Nope. I've yet to find reference to this in the documentation relating
to setting up tunnels. Do
Hi,
Have you enabled the tunnel-services statement at the [ edit chassis fpc
slot-number pic pic-number] stanza?
Otherwise the ipip.0 tunnel is only from the RE, which can't forward transit
traffic.
Truman
On 23/12/2009, at 8:47 AM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
> Excerpts from Truman Boyes's me
This is expected behaviour. All other IP packets will also have an ip-options
field and they are matching so they are then discarded. Maybe you need some
more terms to accomplish what you want. I suspect you might want to explicitly
discard specific ip-options.
Truman
On 21/12/2009, at 7:
WangGuan,
The ERX supports static subscriber interfaces, but configuration is a very
manual process unless you also have an SDX/SRC:
interface ip rs192.168.112.26
ip share-interface GigabitEthernet 4/0.21
ip unnumbered loopback 1
no ip proxy-arp
ip source-prefix 192.168.112.26 255.255.255.25
Excerpts from Truman Boyes's message of Tue Dec 22 04:17:22 -0800 2009:
> Can you post the relevant configuration from the box? I expect that the host
> is
> directly connect to the MX-960; and the interface that is facing the host is
> running RA; furthermore if you look at the routing table on t
What? this isn't JTAC? =)
Regards,
- Chris.
On 2009-12-22, at 7:22 AM, Shane Short wrote:
> I don't know about anyone else, but I'd really appreciate it, if every post
> you posted wasn't 'urgent'.
>
> We're not here to serve you.
>
> -Shane
>
> On 22/12/2009, at 10:17 PM, chandrasekaran
I don't know about anyone else, but I'd really appreciate it, if every post you
posted wasn't 'urgent'.
We're not here to serve you.
-Shane
On 22/12/2009, at 10:17 PM, chandrasekaran iyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
>I have following topology
> ospf
> Agilent---
The router does need to know who is the ASBR otherwise it won't
install this route in the RIB. So the router need to have a LSA type 4
present in the ospf database.
JNCIS Study Guide page 85.
HTH
./diogo -montagner
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 12:17 PM, chandrasekaran iyer
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I ha
Scott,
I think the packet dropping is unavoidable, no matter how you configure RED.
Most of the time, your TCP is in congestion avoidance state, it increases
its transmission window size by one every RTT (round trip time). In other
words, it will increase its transmission rate till congestion happ
Hi,
I have following topology
ospf
Agilentrouter
I am pumping type 5 ext LSA from agilent to the router.
I observe in the ospf database, i am seeing Extern LSA, but i
dont see it in the routing table. What could be the re
9.3S5 _is_ a Service Release and it is fully supported.
It _is_ intended for production use.
E-EOL releases are maintained using the Service Release
mechanism, and, as you were told, there will be no more
"R" releases for 9.3. Throughout the remainder of the
9.3 E-EOL support period, there will
Hi, the ERX does not support 802.1x. In a static environment you can restrict
MAC address on an interface though ... The ERX can provide RADIUS proxy support
to an 802.1x network that is downstream from the ERX.
Cheers,
Truman
On 14/12/2009, at 6:38 PM, guan wang wrote:
> Hi All
>
> As i k
On a regular PIC (ie. non IQ/IQ2/etc...) you do not have individual queues per
IFL. Therefore you can only queue on a single aggregate (ie. IFD).
You may want to explore using policers on outbound based on DSCP/ToS markings.
I know it's not exactly what you are looking for, but you should be ab
Can you post the relevant configuration from the box? I expect that the host is
directly connect to the MX-960; and the interface that is facing the host is
running RA; furthermore if you look at the routing table on the host, you will
see a default route to the MX's link-local address?
Now is
Hi Tima
If JTAC recommends a specific Junos Service release for your network,
you can few it as being equivalent to a maintenance release. A service
release is also requestion tested against the required platforms but
does not have release notes as you mentioned.
On 2009/12/22 10:01, Tima Ma
Hello there!
Let's say i have 9.3R3.8 and 9.3R4.4 in production
I hit some bugs here and there. JTAC provided me with fix for one bug and gave
me 9.3S5 version. Also they told me i can use it in producion.
Now i have questions.
Is it service release or not? If yes, i don't want to use in prod
19 matches
Mail list logo
