Hi, All.
I'm not quite sure when to use the "family ccc" config stanza.
I know that this stanza should be used when applying a filter or a
policer, but what if I don't need one?
The official document is not quite clear about this, either:
On 10 February 2016 at 19:12, Pyxis LX wrote:
Hey,
> P.12: The vlan-ccc configuration does not have family ccc stanza, but
> the extended-vlan-ccc configuration has.
>
> Can this be safely omitted?
The family needs to be CCC. But it often is by default due to IFL
> The better to do is testing.
>
> For example I have a case when I'm forced to used something like this :
>
> ge-0/0/X {
> encapsulation ethernet-ccc;
> unit 0 {
> family ccc;
> }
> }
If you're using this for a port-based pseudowire (l2circuit) you only
need "unit 0",
The better to do is testing.
For example I have a case when I'm forced to used something like this :
ge-0/0/X {
encapsulation ethernet-ccc;
unit 0 {
family ccc;
}
}
With encapsulation ethernet-ccc i'm wondering what other family was
expected ? but without the "familly
Le 10/02/2016 19:13, sth...@nethelp.no a écrit :
If you're using this for a port-based pseudowire (l2circuit) you only
need "unit 0", not the "family ccc" part.
Yep in theory.
But on some platform the familly ccc stanza is mandatory, if not the
encapsulation on the sub interface .0 remain
Hi folks,
Where are the “VRF specific” forwarding-filters executed please?
In a setup like this:
set routing-instances TEST_VRF forwarding-options family inet filter input
TEST_FW_IN
WAN-W—PFE-W--Fabric—PFE-E—WAN-E
PFE-West hosts an MPLS interface
PFE-East hosts a TEST_VRF interface
Fact:
6 matches
Mail list logo