> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ross Vandegrift
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 6:09 PM
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [j-nsp] 1000 VRRP instances per IFD and IRB
>
> Hey guys,
>
>
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> That is correct.
>
> Just to summarize, there are 2 things needed to get this FRF.16 working
>
> - M20 needs a hardware based Services PIC to create ls- or lsq- interfaces
> - ML PIC which you currently have in your M20 can only do MLPPP and FRF.15
> style MLFR. Hence y
That is correct.
Just to summarize, there are 2 things needed to get this FRF.16 working
- M20 needs a hardware based Services PIC to create ls- or lsq- interfaces
- ML PIC which you currently have in your M20 can only do MLPPP and FRF.15
style MLFR. Hence you will need either LS PIC or AS/AS2
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> I think Multilink PIC does not support FRF.16 configuration ( mlfr-uni-nni
> bundle or multiple DLCIs in a single bundle). You will need LS PIC or AS/AS2
> PIC (with Layer-2 package) to do that. If you need it only for Layer2
> purpose you can also go for AS-2 Layer 2 Servic
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> Sorry...my bad. With Multi-link pic look for ml-2/0/0 interfaces. However, I
> am not sure if ml- interfaces supports FRF.16 configuration that you are
> trying to achieve. I know it can do FRF.15 but not sure about FRF.16. You
> can try and see if it works. I will see if I
I think Multilink PIC does not support FRF.16 configuration ( mlfr-uni-nni
bundle or multiple DLCIs in a single bundle). You will need LS PIC or AS/AS2
PIC (with Layer-2 package) to do that. If you need it only for Layer2
purpose you can also go for AS-2 Layer 2 Services only PIC.
The current ML P
Sorry...my bad. With Multi-link pic look for ml-2/0/0 interfaces. However, I
am not sure if ml- interfaces supports FRF.16 configuration that you are
trying to achieve. I know it can do FRF.15 but not sure about FRF.16. You
can try and see if it works. I will see if I can confirm it.
Thanks,
Niles
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> Jim,
>
> You need a Physical service PIC in slot 1/2 (or 1/3 as per your below
> comment) to do ls- or lsq-. On J-series platform these interfaces are
> created by software but on M20, you need a physical service PIC (either Link
> Services or Adaptive Services configured w
Jim,
You need a Physical service PIC in slot 1/2 (or 1/3 as per your below
comment) to do ls- or lsq-. On J-series platform these interfaces are
created by software but on M20, you need a physical service PIC (either Link
Services or Adaptive Services configured with layer-2 package) to get ls- or
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> What kind of PIC do you have in FPC slot 1 PIC slot 2?
FPC 0FPC
PIC 0 4x F/E, 100 BASE-TX
PIC 1 1x G/E, 1000 BASE-LX
PIC 2 1x G/E, 1000 BASE-LX
PIC 3 4x T3
FPC 1FPC
PIC 0 4x CT3
PIC 1
Hi,
just to keep this information archived to others, even it sounds obvious:
don't try to boot FreeBSD directly at Juniper. :)
What I did to have it working?
Got HD back to PC, pkg_add on jinstall package, once it asked me to reboot,
turn off PC ('halt' does it fine).
Put HD on RE, have it boo
Hey guys,
Accoridng to our account team, VRRP scales to about 1000 instances per
IFD. Not that I want to scale beyond Juniper's tested specs, but has
anyone pushed on this?
Anyone have any experience on many VRRP instances per IFD? How many?
We're planning on doing vrrp inheritance so only a si
What kind of PIC do you have in FPC slot 1 PIC slot 2?
- Nilesh
On 7/8/10 2:12 PM, "Jim Lucas" wrote:
> Nilesh Khambal wrote:
>> Do you have "show chassis hardware" output?
>
> Yes, what specifically are you looking for?
>
>>
>> - Nilesh
>>
>>
>> On 7/8/10 12:37 PM, "Jim Lucas" wrote:
>>
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> Do you have "show chassis hardware" output?
Yes, what specifically are you looking for?
>
> - Nilesh
>
>
> On 7/8/10 12:37 PM, "Jim Lucas" wrote:
>
>> Nilesh Khambal wrote:
>>> Jim,
>>>
>>> What kind of Service PIC are you using for this purpose. Is it Link Services
>
Do you have "show chassis hardware" output?
- Nilesh
On 7/8/10 12:37 PM, "Jim Lucas" wrote:
> Nilesh Khambal wrote:
>> Jim,
>>
>> What kind of Service PIC are you using for this purpose. Is it Link Services
>> PIC or Adaptive Service PIC configured in Layer-2 mode under [edit chassis]?
>>
>>
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
> Jim,
>
> What kind of Service PIC are you using for this purpose. Is it Link Services
> PIC or Adaptive Service PIC configured in Layer-2 mode under [edit chassis]?
>
> You need either link services or adaptive service PIC (with L2 mode) to
> create the ls- or lsq- interfa
Jim,
What kind of Service PIC are you using for this purpose. Is it Link Services
PIC or Adaptive Service PIC configured in Layer-2 mode under [edit chassis]?
You need either link services or adaptive service PIC (with L2 mode) to
create the ls- or lsq- interface.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 7/8/10 9:3
I guess you dont get any more console output since after that last line
the system will send all output to VGA only. Before the output was
handled by the bios and redirected to the com port.
So (i guess) you have to make the freebsd installation to send all
console output to the correct com-port...
Jonas,
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Jonas Frey wrote:
> I guess you dont get any more console output since after that last line
> the system will send all output to VGA only. Before the output was
> handled by the bios and redirected to the com port.
> So (i guess) you have to make the freebs
Equipment:
1 Juniper M20 running JunOS 7.5R1.12
2 Cisco 2611 running 12.4.23 IOS
Multiple T1 connections between the above devices
Background: I have read the following literature.
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos56/swconfig56-interfaces/html/interfaces-multilink-config25.htm
Interestingly you see a hidden route if the static route does a
recursive lookup. See config below and then show route output. The
nexthop interface for 10.0.21.2 is down when the below was executed.
This seems to show that at commit time , unless a static is set to
resolve via indirect next-hops,
We put a router in place to do NAT for the local subnet of the fxp.
Alternately, you can just put static routes in for specific management subnets
pointing out the fxp port...
From: Serge Vautour
To: Chen Jiang ; Jim Devane
Cc: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
Maybe cheat? Put the old HDD in a working RE, (good CF), do an
install-media and from extern flash. The boot, do a "request system
snapshot"
Then put the HDD back in foobar'd RE and boot.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Felipe Zanchet Grazziotin
wrote:
> Gentlemen,
>
> thank you for all those
Putting fxp0 in a LS works from a routing perspective but it breaks NSR & GRES
-
at least it does in 10.0R2. I have a JTAC case pending.
Serge
- Original Message
From: Chen Jiang
To: Jim Devane
Cc: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
Sent: Thu, July 8, 2010 4:54:15 AM
Subject: Re: [j-ns
I do this in my network. It works well.
David
On 7 July 2010 18:33, Chris Kawchuk wrote:
> Answer:
>
> interfaces {
>fxp0 {
>description "MANAGEMENT";
>speed 100m;
>link-mode full-duplex;
>unit 0 {
>family inet {
>address 10.2.1
Gentlemen,
thank you for all those answers on my previous question, about replacing M7i
HD.
Just replaced that crashed HD with an IDE one, notebook sized.
Haven't found a SSD at good prices, still searching for one.
In this new HD I've installed FreeBSD 4.4-mini (minimum install, just
default op
Hello everyone,
I have m7i box with 256 MB CF. I need to upgrade my JunOS. Yet, CF
capacity is not enough. Is it possible to use my hard drive as primary
boot device and use my router without CF.
Thanks
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puc
It's not about using the line cards. It's about keeping the fxp0
routes separate and isolated from the production routes. If you
happen to have overlapping address ranges between your production and
management subnets, you will have a problem that fxp0 routes will
interfere with production tr
You could also put your production traffic into a VRF (not a logical
system). Not sure if MS-DPC will work for VRFs (routing-instances).
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 03:54:15PM +0800, Chen Jiang wrote:
> You cannot put fxp0 into VRF but could put it into a logical system. And
> logical system also ha
I believe because the route is invalid it won't even put it into the rib as
a candidate route. IOS devices work this way as well.
On Jul 8, 2010 7:42 AM, "Thomas Eichhorn" wrote:
Yes, I did.
The route is not hidden - it simply doesn't exist in any routing table,
which is my problem - I see thi
Yes, I did.
The route is not hidden - it simply doesn't exist in any routing table,
which is my problem - I see this as a false behaviour...
Tom
On 08.07.2010 12:22, Phill Jolliffe wrote:
> did you type "show route hidden"?
>
> The is a hidden route counter for each table, inet.x, itn the top
>
did you type "show route hidden"?
The is a hidden route counter for each table, inet.x, itn the top
right output of "show route"
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Thomas Eichhorn wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just had a strange moment on one of my EXes:
>
> I had configured a static route, but entere
Hi all,
I just had a strange moment on one of my EXes:
I had configured a static route, but entered a next-hop
which simply doesn't exist.
I expected to see the route as hidden marked with
'invalid next-hop' or something like that, but the route
simply wasn't shown anywhere except the configurat
What we did as we have different IP ranges that access via the Fxp0 was
to NAT on the next-hop router connected to the FXP port. So that all
traffic appears to the fxp as if it was directly connected to it.
Best Regards
William Jackson
Technical Department
Sapphire Networks
-Original Mes
You cannot put fxp0 into VRF but could put it into a logical system. And
logical system also have a seperate routing table other than inet.0.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:16 AM, Jim Devane wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need some ideas/help on a scenario I am sure comes up a lot but having
> problems with.
Putting fxpX or meX interfaces into a VRF is not a good idea. I understand that
you want to have a management VPN, that idea is fine, but the host routing from
the routing engine should not have to rely on other features/line cards of the
box that may need to be serviced.
I tend to use loopback
36 matches
Mail list logo
