-- Forwarded message --
From: Mohammad Khalil
Date: Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:45 AM
Subject: mx480 to mx240 port channel ae
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Hi all , I have mx480 and mx240 routers
I tried to connect them via ether channel (port aggregation) , but there
was remarkabl
People,
Does anyone on list has some experience in running multichassis LAG using
the following interface ?
MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP
This interface has some limitations like LAN-PHY only.
Is it possible to configure virtual chassis with it ?
After configuring virtual chassis it is possible to configu
Hi
How many groups do you have?
David Roy
NOC Engineer at Orange France
JNCIE-SP #703 ; JNCIE-ENT #305
De : juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net]
de la part de Richard A Steenbergen [r...@e-gerbil.net]
Date d'envoi :
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:03:39AM +0200, Tim Vollebregt wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This morning during a maintenance I experienced the route stall bug
> Richard mentioned a few times already on j-nsp.
>
> Hardware kit:
> -MX480 with SCB (non-e)
> -2 x RE-S-1800x4
> -4 x MPC 3D 16x 10GE
> Software ver
Does the Juniper RE not the same as Cisco RSP. I think the control plane
information all need to go to the RE, if RE had any issue, why the traffic
don't have any issue?
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 18 Jul, 2012, at 22:32, "OBrien, Will" wrote:
> Check your fxp0 configuration. You may be ship
Check your fxp0 configuration. You may be shipping return traffic out random
interfaces...
We are leaning toward putting all production traffic inside a virtual routing
instance/chassis and using the main routing instance just for management.
From: juniper
Commit confirmed does not work in 12.1 (SRX550 cluster), and is a known
issue.
Apparently it will be fixed, but no timeframe has been given :-(
It will accept a commit confirmed, but when you decide to keep the changes
made and do a commit, you'll get a "file not found" error, and the config
will
Hello
As advised Derek we shut the STM4 sonet and the errors stopped . (This was
the workaround).
To solve this issue the router needs to be upgaded
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Derek Deviny wrote:
> Yeah, I think disable one interface will help. Ideally you can upgrade.
>
> Origin
Hi,
Is there any suspicious messages logged at that moment ?
There are some PRs related to krt queue stuck, so probably you want to
upgrade to 10.4R10 or investigate this issue with jtac.
https://prsearch.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=prcontent&id=PR722890
On 18.07.2012 2:03, Tim Volle
Hi all , I have mx480 and mx240 routers
I tried to connect them via ether channel (port aggregation) , but there
was remarkable packet loss
CR04# show interfaces ae1
flexible-vlan-tagging;
mtu 1600;
encapsulation flexible-ethernet-services;
aggregated-ether-options {
lacp {
active;
On 12-07-12 3:37 PM, Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim wrote:
Hi,
On Jul 12, 2012, at 3:01 PM, Frank Norman wrote:
...
Now can someone tell me
1) what are the standard models (PPPoE or DHCP ? ) that are being
used in such kind of broadband networks?? and which is more
flexible??
Both are fine from prot
On (2012-07-18 00:03 +0200), Tim Vollebregt wrote:
> IMHO this is a really bad one, and can be a showstopper in some cases.
Blackholing is absolutely worst thing router can do. And Juniper often
seems to have failure modes where they blackhole. In Cisco much more common
failure mode is total fail
12 matches
Mail list logo
