There's Junos tools such as apply-groups and apply-path to help automate
complicated or repetitive configurations.
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of EXT -
plu...@senetsy.ru
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 20
> I remember doing a single line in screenos unless my recollection is off.
>
> On the Cisco ASA/PIX, it's a single line 'static (inside,outside)
> ' statement.
> Is there an equivalently efficient method on the SRX?
>
> Thank you in advance for any input.
>
>
Arp-proxy is needed to attract tr
Proxy-arp isn't required unless you're placing the SRX on a LAN segment where
other costs need to use ARP to reach the VIP instead of a route lookup.
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Daniel M Daloia Jr
I think I understand what you were saying before with routed to you and it
depends on the situation.
For instance.
If I have a public my public interface 1.1.1.1/24 and my next-hop is 1.1.1.254,
if I wanted to static nat 1.1.1.10, then I would need to use proxy-arp for the
public interface wi
I've got two srx3400 clusters that disagree with you about proxy-arp. :)
Scott
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 7:50 PM, Daniel M Daloia Jr
wrote:
> Almost positive that proxy-arp is required for NAT on the SRX series if the
> destination addresses is not assigned to the interface. Not in front of my
> ge
Almost positive that proxy-arp is required for NAT on the SRX series if the
destination addresses is not assigned to the interface. Not in front of my gear
now, but can lab it out tomorrow. As for the static NAT, two lines is
necessary.
-Dan
- Original Message -
From:Scott T. Cameron
You should only need proxy-arp if your particular routing scenario requires
it. If all the IPs that you are answering for are routed to you, then
there's no need for proxy-arp.
However, you'll still require 2 lines per static nat. One for the match,
and one for the action.
Scott
On Wed, Mar 2,
I am looking for a more efficient method to define/map several
scattered/non-contiguous static NATS. I can use pools to map ranges
for end user blocks, but this need is for publishing services
(servers) globally on a one by one basis.
ex.,
using the following method, I would need to make a separ
On 2/27/11 11:55 AM, "Keegan Holley" wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
>> On (2011-02-24 17:15 -0800), Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>>
>> > that activity can be simple as front-running large orders (which take
>> > longer to fill) with small ones, an elaborate algorithm is not
meryem Z writes:
>Is secure ftp supported on juniper m-series routers running junos OS 9.0 ?
>what are alte
>rnatives to secure ftp tranfers ?
scp is the main secure path. You can scp to and from routers. In the CLI,
the file syntax includes the scp-style '[user@]host:[path]' syntax, and
variou
Hi,
You can use scp.
Regards,
David
David Roy
Orange - IP Domestic Backbone - TAC
Tel. +33(0)299876472
Mob. +33(0)685522213
Email. david@orange-ftgroup.com
JNCIE-M/T #703 ; JNCIS-ENT
-Message d'origine-
De : juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@p
Hello community,
Is secure ftp supported on juniper m-series routers running junos OS 9.0 ? what
are alternatives to secure ftp tranfers ?
Thank you.
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.
Patrik,
It works ok .. we ran this with two full ipv4/v6 tables . just don't try
and do NSR as well it will crash
moving to a MX80's sorted it out
--
term
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailma
Patrik,
its possible and works well. If you only have 1 full bgp feed i wouldnt
worry. If you have multiple they best thing is to upgrade to RE3.
Also keep in mind that you can easily max out the SSB-E if you havent
upgraded it to 128MB or 256MB (SSB-E-16).
This is from a RE2/768:
Groups: 11 Pee
14 matches
Mail list logo
