On 23 October 2012 12:05, Julien Goodwin wrote:
>
> As for "high speed link to an EX" something along those lines has now
> been announced as "Node Unifier" for FEX-like support.
>
>
> It's a shame that the sum total of detail on that feature on Juniper's
public website is two paragraphs that giv
On 23/10/12 01:53, David Miller wrote:
> We were told 2+ years ago that Juniper would be releasing a module for
> the port in the back of the MX5 - MX80 that could be used to VC another
> MX -or- be used as high speed link to an EX (4200 / 8500). This has
> changed a few times in our discussions w
hash-key = DPC (should never been been on or used on the MX80 - doesn't
even do anything when configured)
enhanced-hash-key = MPC (which works on the MX80 as it's based on Trio)
On 10/22/12 5:36 PM, "Paul Vlaar" wrote:
>I just upgraded one of our MX80s to 12.2R1.3, and the following occurs:
>
I just upgraded one of our MX80s to 12.2R1.3, and the following occurs:
mx80# show forwarding-options
[...]
##
## Warning: configuration block ignored: unsupported platform (mx80-48t)
##
hash-key {
family inet {
layer-3;
layer-4;
}
family inet6 {
layer-3;
Chuck,
thanks for the pointer and for the example code. This would definitely
work, but I'd still like to see if I can do this without an additional
switch.
I've been playing with L2 port mirroring and this config came out so far:
mx80# show forwarding-options port-mirroring family vpls
output {
Doug,
thanks for the book. Nice to see the kindle edition also. I will
definitely order it today.
Can you recommend the book of same depth for the EX series?
thanks
Nick
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/ma
> How do you get the PDF version? I don't see it mentioned anywhere. I'd love
> to be able to order paperback but get the PDF now :D
http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920023760.do PDF ebook.
--
Kind Regards,
Gavin Henry.
Managing Director.
T +44 (0) 1224 279484
M +44 (0) 7930 323266
F +44 (0
> I think you should check out the new MX book then. You'll be surprised at
> the amount of shell commands. The architecture chapter does cover a day in
> the life of a packet on all of the major MPCs.
Just bought the PDF! I'm almost finished the other Junos O'Reilly
books on Safari (but
have also
I think you should check out the new MX book then. You'll be surprised at
the amount of shell commands. The architecture chapter does cover a day in
the life of a packet on all of the major MPCs.
On 10/22/12 12:49 PM, "Saku Ytti" wrote:
>On (2012-10-22 17:18 +), Doug Hanks wrote:
>
>> These
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2012-10-22 17:18 +), Doug Hanks wrote:
>
> > These numbers will change with every hardware release and software
> > release. I used a generic number with the MX book.
> >
> > The idea is that as soon as the book hits the shelf, the test
On (2012-10-22 17:18 +), Doug Hanks wrote:
> These numbers will change with every hardware release and software
> release. I used a generic number with the MX book.
>
> The idea is that as soon as the book hits the shelf, the testing numbers
> would have been obsolete anyway (it took Harry an
These numbers will change with every hardware release and software
release. I used a generic number with the MX book.
The idea is that as soon as the book hits the shelf, the testing numbers
would have been obsolete anyway (it took Harry and I about 14 months to
write).
Your SE should be more th
On 10/22/2012 9:05 AM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> From what I heard at the SE Summit, never. It was just too difficult to do
> with a single RE, so they have dumped it.
>
> But, there is another product coming which is similar, but will be able to
> do it from the start.
>
> This is all conjecture
On (2012-10-22 13:21 +0100), Darren O'Connor wrote:
> It was Doug Hanks that said it. And he wrote the new MX book
I've not read this book. But I find it really shame if book presents
simplified marketing numbers instead of giving reader understanding of the
platform.
Juniper seems much more hesi
>From what I heard at the SE Summit, never. It was just too difficult to do
with a single RE, so they have dumped it.
But, there is another product coming which is similar, but will be able to
do it from the start.
This is all conjecture and hearsay ;-)
*
*
*Skeeve Stevens, CEO - *eintellego Pt
It was Doug Hanks that said it. And he wrote the new MX book
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:45:16 +0300
> From: s...@ytti.fi
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX5 vs Brocade CER
>
> On (2012-10-22 12:03 +0100), Darren O'Connor wrote:
>
> > Why then does Juniper say it
I have heard it is still quite aways out yet. I too wish they had it as it is
the nonredundant platform so would be nice.
On Oct 22, 2012, at 6:49 AM, Riccardo S wrote:
Does anybody knows if there is a chance to have soon available the virtual
chassis feature on MX5 - MX80 ?
As far as I u
Does anybody knows if there is a chance to have soon available the virtual
chassis feature on MX5 - MX80 ?
As far as I understood Juniper announced it for Q3 2011, but nothing has been
released...
Tks
Ric
___
On (2012-10-22 12:03 +0100), Darren O'Connor wrote:
> Why then does Juniper say it can hold 1 million in FIB?
Because that is what marketing department asked them to say. Maybe also
because that is what they actively test it before release.
--
++ytti
__
Why then does Juniper say it can hold 1 million in FIB?
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:45:07 +0300
> From: s...@ytti.fi
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX5 vs Brocade CER
>
> On (2012-10-22 08:57 +0100), Darren O'Connor wrote:
>
> > CER-RT supports 1.5 million IPv4
On (2012-10-22 08:57 +0100), Darren O'Connor wrote:
> CER-RT supports 1.5 million IPv4 in FIB, MX only does 1 million. However the
> CER-RT uses a slightly slower ram to hold these routes as opposed to TCAM for
> it's MLX/XMR bigger brothers. I'm not 100% sure what the performance knock
> for t
Hello everyone!
Does anyone know if MACsec works in combination with LAG ?
For example, if i have 2x 10G between two EX4550 switches bundled in a
LAG, can i use MACsec on this connection ?
Can i use MACsec if i have two CE switches (EX4550) connected via service
provider network, that offers m
CER-RT supports 1.5 million IPv4 in FIB, MX only does 1 million. However the
CER-RT uses a slightly slower ram to hold these routes as opposed to TCAM for
it's MLX/XMR bigger brothers. I'm not 100% sure what the performance knock for
this is as I've not done extensive testing.
Other than that,
I replaced some months ago a 7600-SUP32 with one Brocade CER2024 and I was
very satisfied about their performance.
Some features tested by me: bgp. Ospf, ldp, mpls, vrf, eompls,
spanning-tree,ipv6, wire speed 10G ports.
The olny feature not supported at that time was ipv6 in vrf,but they
promised
24 matches
Mail list logo
