[j-nsp] [SRX650] show pfe statistics weirdness

Hello, There is something I don't understand. There is a SRX650 running BFD for OSPF sessions. BFD is working, however I wanted to make sure that it is processed in PFE. All counters of show pfe statistics traffic protocol bfd are zero, but BFD-related counters of show pfe statistics traffic are

Re: [j-nsp] [SRX650] show pfe statistics weirdness

Hi Nick, This is where the SRX platform differs from that of the M/T/MX etc. BFD processing is NOT offloaded to the PFEs - this is all done by the RE. This has caused one of my customers many problems and unfortunately is by design - this relates to the SRX 3600. HTH, Graham On 14 November

Re: [j-nsp] [SRX650] show pfe statistics weirdness

Thank you Graham. Just to clarify. counters in Packet Forwarding Engine local protocol statistics - what are they? My understanding was that they represent the number of network-control packets handled by PFE. thanks Nick ___ juniper-nsp mailing list

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

Folks: When Trio MPCs were released, original behavior pertaining to policer behavior on VPLS instances was different from that observed on I-CHIP DPCs (as has been uncovered in this thread). This was changed via PR/674408, which should now be externally viewable. It changes the default Trio

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

On (2012-11-14 12:19 -0500), Addy Mathur wrote: When Trio MPCs were released, original behavior pertaining to policer behavior on VPLS instances was different from that observed on I-CHIP DPCs (as has been uncovered in this thread). This was changed via PR/674408, which should now be

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

Except I am running network-services ip not enhanced-ip, and 10.4R10 now R11 (PR lists R9 as fixed) and am seeing shared policers. On 11/14/12 8:19 AM, Addy Mathur wrote: Folks: When Trio MPCs were released, original behavior pertaining to policer behavior on VPLS instances was different

Re: [j-nsp] VPLS Multihoming

Luca, My question is - on PE2 is it normal for it to show the VPLS connections in a 'LN' (local site not designated) state, as shown below: PE2show vpls connections Layer-2 VPN connections: snip Legend for interface status Up -- operational Dn -- down Instance: VPLS-DirectNetworks Local

Re: [j-nsp] Weird SRX flow timeout issue

Just by way of being complete, we closed the issue by enabling the Postgres keep alive settings which now ensures the flows stay open. There may still be a bug in there somewhere, but in true network style we'll just pretend it's not there now we have found another solution. Until next time...

[j-nsp] Divert one specific VRF (L3 MPLS VPN) or L2 circuit over RSVP-TE

Hi, I am testing RSVP-TE in Juniper MX Junos 11.2R3. Is there a way to have a RSVP-TE between ingress and egress PE and use that RSVP-TE only for one specific L3 MPLS VPN or L2 Circuit VPN customer and other VPN customers between the same ingress and egress PE to prefer a IGP/LDP path? In case

Re: [j-nsp] Divert one specific VRF (L3 MPLS VPN) or L2 circuit over RSVP-TE

I am testing RSVP-TE in Juniper MX Junos 11.2R3. Is there a way to have a RSVP-TE between ingress and egress PE and use that RSVP-TE only for one specific L3 MPLS VPN or L2 Circuit VPN customer and other VPN customers between the same ingress and egress PE to prefer a IGP/LDP path? In case