Re: [j-nsp] instance-specific filters for VPLS BUM/flood filtering

Please share case #, I have same complaints in discussion with our SE and up that chain. Personally I think they need to add instance-specific as a keyword to the policer to make them shared or not-shared by choice. 95% of the time I need unshared, but can think of a few cases where shared

Re: [j-nsp] port mirror to multiple ports on MX80 in inet6

Paul, Just to come full circle on that IRB issue and L2 port mirroring. From page 213 in Hanks and Reynolds _Juniper MX Series_: If the packet's L2 destination MAC matches the router's IRB MAC address Its important to note that any bridge family filters applied to the related Layer 2

[j-nsp] STP Between Cisco and Juniper

Hi, I have a Layer 2 network consisting of a Cisco 2970G, SRX210 and SRX100. Following are the STP modes supported on each: Cisco 2970G: mst, pvst, rapid-pvst Juniper SRX100: STP, RSTP. MSTP Juniper SRX210: STP, RSTP My question is: Is Cisco mst interoperable with Juniper RSTP. What mode should

Re: [j-nsp] STP Between Cisco and Juniper

MSTP would probably be the best on both the cisco and the Juniper... It is a standards based protocol where Cisco's pvst and rapid-pvst are proprietary Luca -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Saba

Re: [j-nsp] STP Between Cisco and Juniper

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Saba Sumsam saba+j...@eintellego.net wrote: Hi, I have a Layer 2 network consisting of a Cisco 2970G, SRX210 and SRX100. Following are the STP modes supported on each: Cisco 2970G: mst, pvst, rapid-pvst Juniper SRX100: STP, RSTP. MSTP Juniper SRX210: STP,