On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Doug Hanks wrote:
> Thanks to couple of people pinged me off-list; I accidentally switched
> around the MX80. The MICs are installed where the switch fabric would
> have been and the 4x10G are where the MICs would have been.
>
> You essentially get 4x10GE ports for
> You don't happen to run 10.2R2 where I know there is a bug preventing the BUM
> messages to be sent between vpls nodes.
Thanks for the response Daniel. I'm running this - it is possibly
slightly older than the "10.2R2" that you mention..:
---
Hostname: MX240
Thanks for the response Stefan. Yes, config in DUT13 is fine. I could
ping over that static LSP all the way till the end
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Stefan Fouant
wrote:
> Stupid question, but you do have DUT13 configured for the static LSP as well
> correct?
>
>
> Sent from my HTC on the Now
You may look at "global policies" on the SRX. It may simplify your
configuration (if I'm understanding you correctly.)
Patrick
From: Shombra Shombra
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 8:40 AM
Subject: [j-nsp] Configuring policie
Does anyone know what this file is for? I only find it on my EX4500
VCs. I guess it is good that it doesn't run, because otherwise it
looks like it would powerdown the system 2 minutes after it finished
booting up.
{master:0}
root@ex-4500> file list detail /config/rc.d
/config/rc.d:
total 12
-
Hi Shombra,
I am afraid I may not able to understand your question, but in case of SRX you
have to create security policy with "permit action" for every traffic which
crossing "security zone". In simple words every traffic (regardless of ports)
which is traversing from one security zone to anot
Am 09.08.2012 17:13, schrieb Nicolaj Kamensek:
Update:
Since only routed traffic is affected, one might safely asume that this
is not related to the switching hardware. The link itself can't be the
cause as well. It's furthermore unlikely that the router itself is
broken since everything coming
Hello list,
I am a little lost here trying to find the cause for a little packetloss
(up to 1%) I'm seeing in our network. Here is the situation:
a MX480 is acting as a router and layer2 device using irb interfaces for
the routing. It connects two big switches with 10GE each. One is a Cisco
Thanks to couple of people pinged me off-list; I accidentally switched
around the MX80. The MICs are installed where the switch fabric would
have been and the 4x10G are where the MICs would have been.
You essentially get 4x10GE ports for "free" on the MX80 because there's no
switch fabric and you
Hello, First sorry for my english. I have many clients, one client and services
per VLAN. On SRX I try to configure 7 clients and 3 services and 1 WAN, who
some client and service has one VLAN and one ZONE. eg: Clients: Client 1 - VLAN
10 - Zone v10-Client-1 Client 2 - VLAN 20 - Zone v20-Client-
Yup, we can do selective packet mode using firewall filters.
Its normally applied in the input direction however, note, it needs to be
on all interfaces where we will see packets that we dont want to send to
the flow module, ie the reply packets as well
As for a script, sadly dont have one, howev
All,
On the J-series and branch SRX, if you want to use selective packet mode
(because you want to do IPSec at the same time as MPLS, for example)
then, as I understand it, you need to exclude traffic *to* the box
itself from packet mode.
Is this correct?
Does anyone have a handy op-script
You don't happen to run 10.2R2 where I know there is a bug preventing the BUM
messages to be sent between vpls nodes.
Best Regards
Daniel Hilj
9 aug 2012 kl. 14:38 skrev "Stefan Fouant" :
> Stupid question, but you do have DUT13 configured for the static LSP as well
> correct?
>
> Sent from
Stupid question, but you do have DUT13 configured for the static LSP as well
correct?
Sent from my HTC on the Now Network from Sprint!
- Reply message -
From: "Bala Subrahmanyam Venkata"
Date: Thu, Aug 9, 2012 5:31 am
Subject: [j-nsp] Sending vpls broadcast packets over static LSP
To:
Yes, RSVP-TE provider-tunnels is for an inclusive PMSI, dynamically signalled.
Sent from my HTC on the Now Network from Sprint!
- Reply message -
From: "Bala Subrahmanyam Venkata"
Date: Thu, Aug 9, 2012 7:27 am
Subject: [j-nsp] Sending vpls broadcast packets over static LSP
To:
Or perh
Or perhaps the "static" is really a "static RSVP LSP" (and not a true
static LSP which is "static-label-switched-path" in juniper speak)...?
That could explain why it is configured under "rsvp-te" in the
routing-instance...can someone from juniper confirm ?
TIA
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Bal
We see this behaviour on our MX80's running 11.1 and 11.2, but it works
normally in 11.4 (tested on 11.4R2.14 specifically, which is currently
on our lab box). So it seems to be a known (and resolved) issue, JTAC
should be able to provide you with details about exact versions where
this is fixe
Hello-
I'm trying to configure this (Static Point-to-Multipoint Flooding LSP
for vpls):
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos95/swconfig-vpns/id-11510467.html#id-11512557
I have the static LSP up but the broadcast packets don't seem to go
over it. Any specific reason ? I've pasted
Hello,
We use a MX80 and a MX240 as core LAN routers and use netdisco. But
the Bridge MIB seem to be broken from the start:
>From NMS:
$ snmpwalk -v1 -c public router .1.3.6.1.2.1.17
BRIDGE-MIB::dot1dBaseBridgeAddress.0 = Hex-STRING: 80 71 1F C7 F1 D0
BRIDGE-MIB::dot1dBasePort.41 =
19 matches
Mail list logo
