This flow mode thing has (IMO) to be one of the most annoying and quite useless
features.
Perhaps it is useful for firewall/enterprise apps, but please, what else?
--
Leigh
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of Christopher E. Brown
Sent: Tue
I thought it did, additionaly the srx supports duel flow and packet mode.
grrr
--- original message ---
From: Shane Short sh...@short.id.au
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J series users bitten by the massive memory useincrease
with flow mode add, please file jtac cases.
Date: 21st July 2010
Time:
I don't suppose this trick works on the SRX as well? *grin*
-Shane
On 21/07/2010, at 2:54 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
I thought that as soon as you turn MPLS on the flow mode was diabled and you
were back to good old packet mode?
--
Leigh
-Original Message-
From:
I am considering the SRX series and perhaps for J series for a quite
large MPLS deployment and this flow stuff is a pet peeve of mine. From
what I can see, all it means is that a box that used to do rather well
is now limited by the number of flows it can handle and the ludicrous
memory
Just a quick thought... what about renaming the flowd binary..?
No I haven't tested it :)
On 20 July 2010 23:14, Christopher E. Brown chris.br...@acsalaska.netwrote:
I know alot of us here have been bitten by this, and the fact that
disabling flow mode and
reverting to packet does not
Just install Linux on the box ;-)
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Heath Jones
Sent: 21 July 2010 11:05
To: Christopher E. Brown
Cc: juniper-...@punk.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J series users bitten
Just a thought. If this bothers you guys so much, start looking at other
vendors. The only way to get juniper motivated to fix things is to hurt
them financially as they don't seem to care what their existing customers
want imho.
On Jul 21, 2010 6:25 AM, Leigh Porter
On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 02:51:15 pm bit gossip wrote:
Experts,
how is treated traffic which is associated to a
forwarding-class FC9 which is not listed in the
scheduler-map...
We've directed traffic into queues that are not associated
with any schedulers, just for classification purposes,
Chris I have to agree with you there. Its even worse on the 'partner' side
of things.. You customers get informed more than we do (let alone listened
to)!!
To be fair though, a lot of vendors are like this nowadays.
If anyone is interested in forming a vendor that cares about (and
communicates
On the back of this I have a j6350 running 10.0R3.10 and am using for some bgp
and ospf.
Is the best guide to following to move from flow to packet-based this
http://juniper.cluepon.net/index.php/Enabling_packet_based_forwarding or does
anyone have any other suggestions?
Nick
-Original
After implementing the procedure did you see a drop in memory utilization?
If so, how much?
jay
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Ryce
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 7:51 AM
To:
I haven't implemented. I was asking if the below link is the best way to do it
as I would prefer to go back to packet-based.
Nick
-Original Message-
From: Jay Hanke [mailto:jha...@myclearwave.net]
Sent: 21 July 2010 15:10
To: Nick Ryce; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp]
I have an M20 that has been working fine for a few years with no real
issues running 7.6 R4.3. I have been putting off upgrading this guy
long enough and was wondering what you guys thought would be the best
version of JunOS to goto now would be. I was thinking something in
the 8.5 train, but I
Hi all,
I'm currently in the process of migrating the configuration of a 6509 to an MX
and I've got a question or two. I have a customer in one of our metro rings to
which we provide a Q-in-Q tunnel. The A-side is a Q-in-Q port on a switch that
is directly connected to a 6509 'switchport mode
We currently have all of our M20's on 8.5S4 and have had no issues whatsoever,
we upgraded from 7.5-daily. 8.5S4 is an extended release and if you're not
chasing features, I'd look into utilizing it.
Cheers,
Andy Vance
Sr. Network Engineer
Speakeasy
Direct 206.971.5144 . Fax 206.728.1500
My company is also using 8.5S4 for our M20s.
Jonathan
From: ava...@hq.speakeasy.net
To: jmadr...@gmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:12:26 -0700
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] M20 JunOS Recommendation
We currently have all of our M20's on 8.5S4 and have had no issues
Thank you to everyone who responded. I guess I will be going with
8.5R4.3. Thanks again.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Jonathan Call lordsit...@hotmail.com wrote:
My company is also using 8.5S4 for our M20s.
Jonathan
From: ava...@hq.speakeasy.net
To: jmadr...@gmail.com;
On 7/20/10 10:54 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
I thought that as soon as you turn MPLS on the flow mode was diabled and
you were back to good old packet mode?
--
Leigh
Is puts things in packet mode, but all of the memory pre-allocs to
support flow mode remain in play.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 08:12:26AM -0700, Andy Vance wrote:
We currently have all of our M20's on 8.5S4 and have had no issues
whatsoever, we upgraded from 7.5-daily. 8.5S4 is an extended release
and if you're not chasing features, I'd look into utilizing it.
If you're using the original
On 7/21/2010 12:48 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
I think you should actually give the renaming of the binary a go. If you
rename flowd (or name of process using memory), it wont be found and
loaded on next boot. Obviously this is a hack and not what you want to
be relying on in a production network,
I think you should actually give the renaming of the binary a go. If you
rename flowd (or name of process using memory), it wont be found and loaded
on next boot. Obviously this is a hack and not what you want to be relying
on in a production network, but if it solves the issue then good. That and
What is the process name? I thought on the J series it was the fwdd process
or something similar that controlled forwarding.
On 21 July 2010 21:52, Christopher E. Brown chris.br...@acsalaska.netwrote:
On 7/21/2010 12:48 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
I think you should actually give the renaming of
On 7/21/2010 12:34 PM, Smith W. Stacy wrote:
On Jul 21, 2010, at 12:35 PM, Christopher E. Brown wrote:
On 7/20/10 10:54 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
I thought that as soon as you turn MPLS on the flow mode was diabled and
you were
back to good old packet mode?
-- Leigh
Is puts things in
On 7/21/2010 6:09 AM, Jay Hanke wrote:
After implementing the procedure did you see a drop in memory utilization?
If so, how much?
jay
No reduction *AT ALL*, that is the issue.
Turning off flow mode does not free the pre-alloced memory used to support flow
functions.
On 7/21/2010 1:23 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
Chris - Sorry I didnt realise the process had changed names and we are
actually talking about the forwarding process itself. In that case, the
only other thing I can think of right now is:
When the forwarding process starts, it allocates the 400Mb+ for
Has anybody had memory problems after upgrading to a flow based Junos release?
(i.e. the router was perfectly speced before, load the new code and you
suddenly need to uprade everything?)
Perhaps this is just another bug to add to the Junos 10 list ;-)
--
Leigh
-Original Message-
a tad off-topic .. but who's idea was it to send at
juniper-...@punk.nether.nethttp://k.nether.net in stead of puCk. Didn't know
that was even valid?
was playing havoc with mail-rules over here, didn't catch it at first.
I hereby changed it back to puck.nether.nethttp://puck.nether.net
br,
On 7/21/2010 2:28 PM, Nilesh Khambal wrote:
I am not a J-Series person and don't know much about flowd operation but
does the memory utilization come down when you reboot the router after
disabling the flow mode?
How does the flowd memory stats looks like in show system processes
extensive
Hi all,
I have a problem with multicasting on my Brocade/Foundry MLX core (yes
yes, I know I'm - so far - on the wrong maillist).
It's a very simple PIM-SM on top of an OSPF topology.
The problem is that after a while of running multicast fine, it
suddenly freezes channels, leaving only the *,G
Chris - Is the current situation: that Juniper have said there is no
workaround / configuration change that can be made to stop the allocation of
memory for the flow forwarding information?
On 20 July 2010 23:14, Christopher E. Brown chris.br...@acsalaska.netwrote:
I know alot of us here
On 7/21/2010 3:47 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
Chris - Is the current situation: that Juniper have said there is no
workaround / configuration change that can be made to stop the
allocation of memory for the flow forwarding information?
The current response is that this memory consumption is by
Hi,
Are you doing it on J series or M series? J series platform will discard any
unclassified queue (at least, that is what i experienced when i still have j
series with junos 8.x installed) while M series will still forward those
traffic but without any guarantee of traffic (no transmit rate).
32 matches
Mail list logo
