Hi Tommy, Giany, Stefan
I manage to find the problem.
I created a qemu base image with Junos 10.2R1.8, but instead of using the
182559er NIC I used the e1000 for my JUNOS Routers.
I reconfigured all interfaces for JUNOS Routers 1 to 4.
I got this error when committing my configs:
!
root#
-Original Message-
From: Felix Schueren [mailto:felix.schue...@hosteurope.de]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:16 PM
To: Eric Van Tol
Cc: juniper-nsp
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ISIS Routing Problem
Eric,
IS-IS always prefers routes reachable via L1 over those reachable via
L2, and
The formula used in junos for label allocation is :
VPN label = label-base-remote + local-site-id – label-offset-remote
Regds,
Anand
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 6:22 AM, David water dwater2...@gmail.com wrote:
Can some one point me to the easy calculation document for RFC4761 label
allocation
Need to be careful when describing the formula. local/remote site id
means varies depending on perspective.
for example:
PE-A, (connected to customer site id 1), advertises a label base of
1000, range of 4 and offset of 1
This route is received by remote PE-B that has another sight in the
same
I suppose for your case i.e. site-id 30, site-offset is 25. For more
information on JUNOS vpls label allocation refer below link.
http://kb.juniper.net/library/CUSTOMERSERVICE/technotes/Understanding_VPLS_Label_Blocks_Operation.pdf
In summary
site-offset = site-id (site-offset + label-range)
All,
Just a quick question...
We run a pair of Netscreen 5400s with M2 management boards and 10gig
modules, running ScreenOS 6.3, in routed mode.
A while back we discovered a documented limitation, specifically that
these firewalls don't have multicast replication hardware. You can run
Now, how the label base, offset is calculated, we can configure the site id
so how does the router calculate the other values?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Phill Jolliffe ph...@twine-networks.comwrote:
Need to be careful when describing the formula. local/remote site id
means varies
-Original Message-
From: Deon Vermeulen [mailto:vermeulen.d...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 5:05 AM
To: Tommy Perniciaro; Giany; Stefan Fouant
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Olive Qemu/GNS3 networking issue on Snow Leopard
I have a MBPro with 4Gig
Thanks I've picked up that I need quite a bit of Memory to get JUNOS installed.
I used 1534 for installing 10.2. I'm sure 1024 is more then enough for this.
I'm running my qemus with 96MB RAM in GNS3 as I don't want to boot the LAB
every time I want to use it, but I also still want to be able to
# set snmp community XPTO clients 10.31.0.236
Dan
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gabriel Farias
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 4:16 PM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net;
You might also want to try from your server-
# snmpwwalk -c XPTO 10.251.42.230 system
Dan
-Original Message-
From: Dan Farrell
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 4:39 PM
To: 'Gabriel Farias'; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net;
juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp]
Hi Daniel,
thank you for your reply.
I've read the RFC now and you're right. I opened a bug report with quagga
regarding this issue:
https://bugzilla.quagga.net/show_bug.cgi?id=602
OSPFv3 on quagga seems to be a bit buggy in general, I'm still waiting for a
fix of another
problem (bug #600).
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:46:51PM +0200, Volker D. Pallas wrote:
I've read the RFC now and you're right.
I'm not so sure anymore. A fellow reader has challenged my
interpretation of the RFC wording, that it might mean OSPF virtual
links, not tunnel (and similar virtual, non-physical)
Hi again,
yeah, this makes total sense!
At first I thought this is a JUNOS-problem, as Cisco does send the right mtu
along.
I closed the bug report on the quagga bugzilla for now (with closed/invalid)
and will
talk to JTAC.
I'll get back to you and the list as soon as I have some confirmation
14 matches
Mail list logo
