On 12/17/2010 6:06 PM, Stefan Fouant wrote:
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Crist Clark
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 5:12 PM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [j-nsp] Free Certification Exams
On Saturday, December 18, 2010 04:37:20 am Richard A
Steenbergen wrote:
> That said, isis and even basic mpls support (like
> ip->rsvp) is a huge selling point for me, as is the
> ability to reuse my existing scripts, policies, and
> other Juniper management infrastructure from the real
> routers
On Saturday, December 18, 2010 07:23:48 am Richard A
Steenbergen wrote:
> To a certain extent, it still is one JUNOS. When they add
> a new BGP feature you're going to get that feature on
> every box, from your T1600 routing hundreds of gigabits,
> all the way down to your J-series box terminatin
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:29:06AM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> Well, there has been a big push in the last 12 months from
> Cisco to consolidate feature set code on their switches, and
> this has included the addition of IS-IS to their portfolio
> in this class.
>
> Although it's still v4 IS-
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 05:52:21PM -0500, Stefan Fouant wrote:
>
> The thing is it completely goes against their main marketing thrust
> right now, which is the whole "One Junos" mantra. They keep talking
> about how Junos is Junos, across the board, no matter which platform
> and it's their m
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Crist Clark
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 5:12 PM
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [j-nsp] Free Certification Exams
>
> A co-worker and I have both
A co-worker and I have both gotten calls offering deals to get
vouchers for free Juniper certification exams by the end of
the year. I was wary at first, but it seems to check out. I
wish I had more than two weeks with to study, schedule, and
take a certification exam. Especially when those two wee
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Richard A Steenbergen
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 3:09 PM
> To: Chris Morrow
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX unsupported filter pol
I'm having to build RSVP-signalled LSPs to non-adjacent nodes in order to
improve LFA coverage for OSPF and LDP, and am using the 'backup' knob in the
label-switched-path definition to ensure OSPF can use it. Still in the
design/test phase here, but an engineer at Juniper proof-of-concept lab in
I wanted to resurrect an older thread regarding the Loop Free Alternates
feature now available in Junos for OSPF and IS-IS.
http://www.mail-archive.com/juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net/msg09719.html
I am wondering if anyone has any pointers regarding what type of
topologies do not work so well and
Mohan Raut said:
Dear ALL,
I need help on configuration of PBR in juniper router.
However in PBR, right now my requirement is next-hop IP address of remote
router 3 hops away which will pass through MPLS cloud.
No answers for you, but I am very curious about this, too.
If I understand
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 03:28:03PM -0500, Chris Morrow wrote:
>
> "AFL includes licenses for IS-IS, BGP, MPLS and IPv6 routing"
> &&
> "Extend Virtual Private LANs with MPLS"
> &&
>
> You put ISIS and MPLS in a 'this is a Top-of-Rack switch' ... and the
> messaging gets a tad 'confusing'. Is
On 12/17/10 15:09, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 02:37:03PM -0500, Chris Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> It seems to me they are not taking this matter very seriously. Time
>>> flies and nothing changes.
>
> FWIW I've already done an epic amount of bitching about this issue, and
>
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 02:37:03PM -0500, Chris Morrow wrote:
>
> > It seems to me they are not taking this matter very seriously. Time
> > flies and nothing changes.
FWIW I've already done an epic amount of bitching about this issue, and
they ARE aware and working on improving it. Its always ni
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 02:03:20PM -0500, Jack Damn wrote:
> It's the first time I make use of an EX4200 L3 routing capabilities
> and I find it quite troubling and unacceptable that I can't rate-limit
> nor log/syslog in my lo0 ingress filter.
If it makes you feel any better, you can't actually o
On 12/17/10 14:03, Jack Damn wrote:
> Anyone wants to join me here and urge Juniper to do something about
> this ? Please reply and express your discontent, they are monitoring
> this list.
I wish you hearty good tidings in your endeavor... I don't see movement
from Juniper on this front, at al
It's the first time I make use of an EX4200 L3 routing capabilities
and I find it quite troubling and unacceptable that I can't rate-limit
nor log/syslog in my lo0 ingress filter.
Ref:
http://www.mail-archive.com/juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net/msg08092.html
http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page
Dear all,
I have a problem with counting multicast packets sending out to Receiver
Site.
Source--PE-PEReceiver
PE-Receiver connection is IRB interface.
I have put an output filter facing Receiver site with destination-MAC (
converted MAC address from Group Addres
18 matches
Mail list logo
