Shouldn't affect it in the classical BGP active./backup sense; only 1 'vrf' is
active in a multi-homing BGP setup.
However, since the SRX/J doesn't do that, both will end up being active -
You'll need a way to suppress one of them from getting any traffic. Perhaps
think about using an EX4200 u
Just FYI:
The Juniper SKU for the MX c19/c20 power cord is CBL-MX-PWR-C19-C20 if anyone
needed it.
Patrick
From: joel jaeggli
To: JA
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX960 AC power strip
On 8/23
On 8/23/12 6:59 AM, JA wrote:
Hi
I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.
Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
while Juniper has no provision for such power cords.
we use c19-c20 cables. we have a standard supplier for those so I don't
be
You can easily get >30A PDUs with L6-20Rs which is what Juniper
recommends for the MX960...
e.g.
http://www.apc.com/products/resource/include/techspec_index.cfm?base_sku=AP7893
Geist, ServerTech, etc. all also make many many options.
-Scott H.
-Login Inc.
On 08/23/2012 07:59 AM, JA wrote:
H
We run 208v to ours, which reduces the amp load. Then we use 1u rackable
tripplite PDUs on 30a circuits with C13s and C19s and C19-C20 cables.
Will
On Aug 23, 2012, at 8:59 AM, JA wrote:
> Hi
>
> I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.
>
> Usually high capacity (32A) power
I double checked the hardware guide to ensure, and they're not fixed cable:
http://www.juniper.net/shared/img/products/mx-series/mx960/mx960-rear-high.jpg
(If you're using the high-cap supplies there's a second input on the
PSU's themselves)
So just 8x C18-19 cables would be fine.
On 23/08/12 2
Hi
I need advice if someone is having an MX960 up on AC power.
Usually high capacity (32A) power bars (PDU) come with C13 or C19 outlets
while Juniper has no provision for such power cords. If European power
cords are ordered with MX960, the CEE7/7 plug can be connected to Schuko
outlets. But the
Hi expert
Do Juniper have equivalent product?
With Regard
Wan T
- Via Aiped
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Thanks Apurva for your information.
From: apurva modh
To: Md. Jahangir Hossain
Cc: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
All the Routing engine bound traff
Thanks Doug for your information.
- Original Message -
From: Doug Hanks
To: Md. Jahangir Hossain ; "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] About Juniper Control Plan Policy (CoPP)
This should walk you through most of your que
Your'e right of course :)
My question was more how the VPLS multihoming will affect this setup.
Regards
Johan
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Chris Kawchuk wrote:
> Err VPLS Implies Layer 2 only.
>
> Where is the VRP runninng in-between? Are you doing "vlan-id" inside the
> VPLS instance for
Err VPLS Implies Layer 2 only.
Where is the VRP runninng in-between? Are you doing "vlan-id" inside the VPLS
instance for normalization, then binding an irb.x into it? I dont think that
works in SRX/J either. (l3 within VPLS).
- CK.
On 2012-08-23, at 6:39 PM, Johan Borch wrote:
> "VPLS multi
I saw the following exceptions for SRX-series:
"VPLS multihoming, which allows connecting a CE device to multiple PE
routers to provide redundant connectivity, is not supported on J Series or
SRX Series devices"
I'm going to have two SRX's on each site and using vrrp between them, will
I hit this
13 matches
Mail list logo
