Where do you get the "latest jloader"? It isn't published in the same
place the regular JUNOS images are. You have to happen to see the
TSB/KB article. I hadn't known about any new one since the original
TSB (11.3I20110326_0802_hmerge) until I saw this email.
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:20:26PM
Hi.
Now we are testing Juniper device do CGNAT. MX240 with MS-DPC card.
Everything work fine. I heard that in new year will be shipped new service
card. Can any one say more about "new" MS-DPC?
2013/9/18 rkramer
> I currently use MX240's throughout my routing environment today, and I'm
> lookin
My CGNAT works very well. Currently providing NAT for a few /16s of private
space.
On Sep 18, 2013, at 11:13 AM, rkramer wrote:
> I currently use MX240's throughout my routing environment today, and I'm
> looking to upgrade my existing NAT boxes, which are Cisco ASR's. They are
> running out o
Thank you yes, I'm adding that into our processes here as well to try and
be "safe" about future upgrades.
Cheers,
Paul
From: Chris Jones
Date: Wednesday, 18 September, 2013 12:18 PM
To: Paul Stewart
Cc: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Jloader Update for EX4200
> I
I currently use MX240's throughout my routing environment today, and I'm
looking to upgrade my existing NAT boxes, which are Cisco ASR's. They are
running out of horsepower, and from what I'm seeing, MS-DPC's on MX's
provide more than enough capacity... I'm not planning to do any
firewalling at t
Yes but dont have handy. Easy fix if not in production.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 18, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Phil Mayers wrote:
> On 18/09/13 16:26, Anhost wrote:
>> Known issue easily fixed on some shipped in last quarter. Check with your
>> Juniper rep and they can ID. Not a hardware issue.
>
On 18/09/13 16:26, Anhost wrote:
Known issue easily fixed on some shipped in last quarter. Check with your
Juniper rep and they can ID. Not a hardware issue.
Is there a PR or similar?
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://p
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:51:29PM +, Anders Karlsson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's known Juniper problem. Contact them and they will fix it.
Thanks for clarification. RMA is underway indeed, just wanted to check
if I should expect more failures or it was some irregular spike.
>
> /Anders
>
>
>
Known issue easily fixed on some shipped in last quarter. Check with your
Juniper rep and they can ID. Not a hardware issue.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 18, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Paul Stewart wrote:
> Only a limited number of them deployed so far but no failures *yet*
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> On 2
Only a limited number of them deployed so far but no failures *yet*
Paul
On 2013-09-18 9:43 AM, "Alexandre Snarskii" wrote:
>
>Hi!
>
>Anyone else experienced high failure ratio with SSD disks installed on
>RE-S-1800x4 or it's just we are that "lucky" to have two disks failed
>within one w
We experienced this problem in one new instalation of 2 - MX960 with this
RE 1800
1 SSD disk failure
Opened RMA
2013/9/18 Alexandre Snarskii
>
> Hi!
>
> Anyone else experienced high failure ratio with SSD disks installed on
> RE-S-1800x4 or it's just we are that "lucky" to have two disks faile
Hi!
Anyone else experienced high failure ratio with SSD disks installed on
RE-S-1800x4 or it's just we are that "lucky" to have two disks failed
within one week ? :(
PS: and, just to fill the gap in the documentation: these disks are not
the usual 2.5" notebook-like, they are 1.8" mSATA, not
Hi there...
I was looking around for something this morning on EX4200 and stumbled
across a Jloader update. Initially I presumed it was the original Jloader
update but then realized that it's another update that without applying
could have some pretty serious surprises in store...
My blog has a
On 09/18/2013 12:47 AM, Andy Litzinger wrote:
This does not appear to always be true. I obviously haven't tested
every multicast address, but it seems that pretty much all multicast
traffic directed to 224.0.0.0-239.0.0.255 will cause the switch to
flood traffic to all ports in the vlan.
But a
14 matches
Mail list logo
