Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread joel jaeggli
http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc6192 has an excellent example recipie for juniper and cisco control-plane protection. it's a good starting off point and it covers the rational behind the various elements in detail. some things like my l2 policer were meant to solve invidualized needs there are p

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Misak Khachatryan
Thanks Saku and Joel for detailed explanations, Do You know any good resource to start with lo filters? Recommendations about how much police several types of packets and so on. I don't want to do much experiments on production network. joel jaeggli wrote: On 1/30/14, 6:46 AM, Saku Ytti wrot

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Saku Ytti
On (2014-01-30 09:18 -0800), joel jaeggli wrote: > A good solid control-plane protection acl with sensible rate limits is a > good place to start. Absolutely. But FW policers are only bps not pps (trio hw is fully pps capable and microcode etc, just lacks CLI). You want to give scp, http, bgp mor

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Saku Ytti
On (2014-01-30 16:29 +), santiago martinez wrote: > Hi Saku, agree with you, LPTS is doing a better job right now... > If I'm not wrong or miss interpreting Juniper documentation, Junos ddos > aready support per flow ddos (12.3 and later) I haven't had chance to try out, as we've been on 11.4

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread joel jaeggli
On 1/30/14, 6:46 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: > On (2014-01-30 14:35 +0400), Misak Khachatryan wrote: > >> Thanks Abhi, i saw this document, but i need real life experience >> about hardening thresholds or implementing additional >> filter/policers. > > In my experience there is some build-in unconfigura

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread santiago martinez
Hi Saku, agree with you, LPTS is doing a better job right now... If I'm not wrong or miss interpreting Juniper documentation, Junos ddos aready support per flow ddos (12.3 and later) Best regards Santiago url: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos12.3/topics/task/configuration/scfd-enable-gl

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Saku Ytti
On (2014-01-30 14:35 +0400), Misak Khachatryan wrote: > Thanks Abhi, i saw this document, but i need real life experience > about hardening thresholds or implementing additional > filter/policers. In my experience there is some build-in unconfigurable policer to limit how many packets can hit con

[j-nsp] Wisp On Juniper E320

2014-01-30 Thread Jefferson Battisti
Hi All. We are starting to implement a Wirelless broadband to telecom company. Our B-RAS are Juniper E320. This B-RAS has WISP support? BR. Jefferson ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/jun

[j-nsp] Storm-control SNMP MIB on EX/QFX switches

2014-01-30 Thread marco giuliani
Hi to all, I would like to monitor storm-control events through SNMP on Ex2200/4200 and QFX 5100 switches Are you aware of a storm control specific MIB in Juniper? I am thinking of something like this http://tools.cisco.com/Support/SNMP/do/BrowseMIB.do?local=en&step=2&mibName=CISCO-PORT-STORM-C

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Misak Khachatryan
Thanks Abhi, i saw this document, but i need real life experience about hardening thresholds or implementing additional filter/policers. Abhi wrote: can u check the link below http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos13.2/topics/task/configuration/subscriber-management-ddos-packet.html reg

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Abhi
can u check the link below http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos13.2/topics/task/configuration/subscriber-management-ddos-packet.html   regards abhijeet.c On Thursday, January 30, 2014 2:57 PM, Misak Khachatryan wrote: Hello, > >I met very ugly problem yesterday. Consider following

[j-nsp] MX480 RE-S-2000 IGMP flood

2014-01-30 Thread Misak Khachatryan
Hello, I met very ugly problem yesterday. Consider following scheme: Cisco ASR 1006 | Customer | Juniper EX4200 | | Juniper MX480 Customer connected by one VLAN to both