I'm wondering if under a QinQ interface configuration it's accepted by the MX
the same SVLAN (outer vlan) or the commit will fail.
The PE QinQ interface prospect configuration scenarios are:
1) different SVLAN and CVLAN
2) different SVLAN and same CVLAN
3) same SVLAN and different CVLAN
I meant having two subinterfaces with the four prospected scenarios.
Tks
Messaggio originale
Da: sth...@nethelp.no
Data:
A: dim0...@hotmail.com
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Oggetto: Re: [j-nsp] QinQ interface configuration question
I'm wondering if under a QinQ
I meant having two subinterfaces with the four prospected scenarios.
Right, I believe that is what I replied. So let's do them once more
and see if it answers your questions. If not, you need to clarify
further. Interface ge-0/0/0 used as an example.
1) different SVLAN and CVLAN
interface
What about scenario 4) in this way:
interface ge-0/0/0.1
vlan-tags outer a inner a
and
interface ge-0/0/0.2
vlan-tags outer a inner a
This is what we re talking about.
This doesn't work despite of the different routing-instances, right?
Tks
Sent with Mobile
Messaggio originale
What about scenario 4) in this way:
interface ge-0/0/0.1
vlan-tags outer a inner a
and
interface ge-0/0/0.2
vlan-tags outer a inner a
This is what we re talking about.
This doesn't work despite of the different routing-instances, right?
Obviously doesn't work. And I'm afraid I
Didn't catch your point.
Inside routing-instances configuration you have to declare which interfaces
belongs to... right?
Sent with Mobile
Messaggio originale
Da: sth...@nethelp.no
Data:
A: dim0...@hotmail.com
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Oggetto: Re: R: Re: R:
Yes, this is the point why it doesn't work.
Tks
Sent with Mobile
Messaggio originale
Da: Edward Dore edward.d...@freethought-internet.co.uk
Data:
A: dim0sal dim0...@hotmail.com
Cc: sth...@nethelp.no,juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Oggetto: Re: [j-nsp] QinQ interface
7 matches
Mail list logo
