Hi All,
Anyone know whether M series router support LLDP or not?
>From release note 11.1, I can see LLDP is supported on T Series, but I could
not find any reference for M series. I think if LLDP supported on T series,
M series will support too.
"Link Layer Discovery Protocol (LLDP) support (exte
Running 10.2R3.10 in the 240h ha cluster at the dc and currently 11.1R1.10
on the srx210's in the branches. Have tried diff versions on the branches.
The tunnels come up and work for a random amount of time. Now they don't
come up at all, ike sessions on both ends missing responder cookies. Jus
What kind of issues are you having site to site? We have a lot of SRX doing
site to site and haven't had any issues keeping IPSec tunnels in place...
Running 10.4R4.5 on most boxes to date just curious...
Thanks,
Paul
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[m
Tom,
The tricky part is getting the line rate out of yours (or your wholesaler's)
equipment. What you do with it (ie on the 310) is easier. You could extract it
in these ways:
* ANCP between DSLAM/AN and the ERX to continually exchange line rate details
(best) and feed these data into your qos
Hi Jeff...
I find this quite interesting as we have a fair number of SRX deployed with
a limited number offering Dynamic VPN.
I just checked an SRX210 running 10.2R3.10 that we were planning to upgrade
to 10.4R4.5 as per Juniper recommended release. It does not have this issue
and the dynamic
We've had nothing but bad luck with the pulse client on our srx240h ha
cluster. Right now it's unusable because the license manage thinks licenses
are in use, they're not but we can't reconnect. We don't have the clear
command in our version of junos you do so jtac says reboot em and we can't.
I
I have a very simple VPN configuration for a non-uptime-critical
service, with an SRX240H and Dynamic VPN client licenses. This worked
fine with Junos 10.4R4.5 (JTAC recommended release) and the Juniper
Access Manager client. However, Dynamic VPN sessions were becoming
"stuck," and hours or days
Hello,
We have a setup with an ERX310 for aggregating PPPoE connection (xDSL).
The connections are terminated on a GigabitEthernet interface.
Now we want to setup QoS for VoIP on the downstreamtraffic.
I can create a QoS policy with 2 queues, one best-effort and a voice queue with
strict priorit
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 05:22:17AM -0700, Mehmet Akcin wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2011, at 5:12 AM, tim tiriche wrote:
>
> > Disable igmp snooping on EX?
>
> this worked,
PR/456700, bug is celebrating birthday, fix ETA still 11.4
(alias end of 2011, beginning 2012).
Effectively, using IGMP snooping wi
On Thursday, August 04, 2011 01:43:43 AM tim tiriche wrote:
> Thanks. Does, that mean if you had full mesh RSVP lsp
> you added the same for v6?
> If you had ldp running, you ran two instances one for v4
> and one for v6?
As of today, an IPv6 control plane for LDP and RSVP is not
yet shipping.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 03, 2011 11:40:26 AM tim tiriche wrote:
>
>> Do you normally run mult itopology or single topology for
>> isis when deploying dual stack?
>> Any recommendations and why chose one over the other.
>
> We're a multi-topology ho
On Wednesday, August 03, 2011 11:40:26 AM tim tiriche wrote:
> Do you normally run mult itopology or single topology for
> isis when deploying dual stack?
> Any recommendations and why chose one over the other.
We're a multi-topology house, and turn it on by default with
every new device we add
On Aug 3, 2011, at 5:12 AM, tim tiriche wrote:
> Disable igmp snooping on EX?
this worked,
thanks tim, owe you beer or something =)
mehmet
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Disable igmp snooping on EX?
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Mehmet Akcin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am experiencing a weird issue on mx240 running version 10.4R4.5;
>
> I've 2 mxs connected to each other and vrrp is setup and these routers are
> connected to EX4200.
>
> for ipv4 all seems fine.
>
>
2 masters looks like split-brain to me. If two persons cannot agree on
something - chances are they cannot hear each other. Did you verify the
connectivity?
like running tcpdump on both MX and see if there is a difference?
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 5:17 AM, Mehmet Akcin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am exp
15 matches
Mail list logo
