Re: [j-nsp] Encrypted MPLS between MXes

The new MPC7-10G (Only the 10G version ) support macsec if you need it for 10G Nitzan On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: > On 27 March 2016 at 23:44, Alex K. wrote: > > But as far as Juniper documentation is concerned, MIC-3D-20GE-SFP-E only > > supports MACSec. > > As Trio doe

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

The main reasons were around security. As Adam said it is a factor of me being absolutely sure that nothing from the internet can effect the stability of the network here. Effectively it comes down to ensuring: * filters are set to drop traffic towards our infrastructure on public IP space * fi

Re: [j-nsp] Acx5048 ecmp feature and usage

Engineering team for QFX5100 BU (same Tridend2 box as ACX5048) released a new version with ECMP for MPLS: See the release notes bellow: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos14.1/information-products/topic-collections/ex-qfx-series/release-notes/ex-ocx-qfx-series-junos-release-notes-14.1X53-

Re: [j-nsp] Acx5048 ecmp feature and usage

For L3 and L3VPN ECMP should work fine. For any L2oMPLS you're gonna be SOL. On Mar 28, 2016 9:08 PM, "Alexandre Guimaraes" < alexandre.guimar...@ascenty.com> wrote: > Gents, > > I had a demand where the equipment that best fits is an ACX5048 for N > reasons > > I use some vpls and l2circuits, but

[j-nsp] Acx5048 ecmp feature and usage

Gents, I had a demand where the equipment that best fits is an ACX5048 for N reasons I use some vpls and l2circuits, but there is a feature that i need to use, ecmp. Someone had knownledge about the ecmp feature using ACX5048? Att. AŁexandre > Em 28 de mar de 2016, às 22:34, Mark Tees escrev

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

On 27 March 2016 at 22:02, Saku Ytti wrote: > On 27 March 2016 at 13:37, Mark Tinka wrote: > > Hey, > >> As costs and management got out of control, they run l3vpn's and >> Internet in the same chassis, but on different line cards. >> >> Eventually, everything converged. > > I tend to agree. If t

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

On 27 March 2016 at 21:37, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 27/Mar/16 01:46, Mark Tees wrote: > >> My gut feeling is that the safer option is to run things separately >> but I also do not wish to create an administrative nightmare for other >> people to work on the network. >> >> Any input, experience,

Re: [j-nsp] MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP-R-B VS MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP

I can't answer for this card, but for the MPC4E cards I have, it's a license only SKU. On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Colton Conor wrote: > What are the difference between these two cards? > > Based on the descriptions found online, the MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP-R-B offers > full scale L3 features whe

[j-nsp] MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP-R-B VS MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP

What are the difference between these two cards? Based on the descriptions found online, the MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP-R-B offers full scale L3 features whereas the MPC-3D-16XGE-SFPP offers reduced scale L3 features and requires license to support full scale L3 routes and L3VPN. What is the difference be

Re: [j-nsp] Best Place to Buy Used Juniper

Thanks Damien ;), Colton, I've never received pricing from them so don't know. I'm NZ based and have always worked for a VAR so all my quotes are from Huniper direct and have been brand new. I suspect that they will be more expensive than EBay. But it's like buying a used Audi from the main deale

Re: [j-nsp] Best Place to Buy Used Juniper

I would suggest that this is different from other used gear options in that it is actually gear that is officially certified by Juniper and is not "grey market". This means that you don't have to pay to get it inspected and reinstated per http://www.juniper.net/support/inspection_reinstatement.pd

Re: [j-nsp] Best Place to Buy Used Juniper

Graham, I have never seen this http://junipercpo.net/ website until now. Are they really any different than the rest of the used Juniper guys? How does their pricing compare to what you see on eBay for example? On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Graham Brown wrote: > Hi Colton, > > The official

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

On 28/Mar/16 13:36, Tarko Tikan wrote: > > Every network is different and YMMV. I think we can all agree on that. Mark. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

hey, Given our current network architecture, we have not found a significant technical or commercial reason to separate VPN traffic from Internet traffic as a function of what that will cost us in money and human terms. Every network is different and YMMV. In our case, we run BGP-free MPLS ag

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

On 28 March 2016 at 13:32, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: > Public means exposed to whims of the wild Internet, that is in both data > rates (DDoS) and updates (Malformed BGP updates) something you can't control. > Private means very good control over traffic rates and control plane (number > of updates

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

On 28/Mar/16 12:32, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: > Although I agree with all points made I'm missing one very important factor > which in my opinion shapes the decision whether to go with a converged > network significantly and its also pertinent to the "Core network design for > an ISP" thread and

Re: [j-nsp] Separate internet transit network versus converged

Hey Saku, Mark, > Saku Ytti > Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 12:02 PM > > On 27 March 2016 at 13:37, Mark Tinka wrote: > > Hey, > > > As costs and management got out of control, they run l3vpn's and > > Internet in the same chassis, but on different line cards. > > > > Eventually, everything conver