Re: [j-nsp] ACX5048 - Virtual Chassis

2016-05-12 Thread Giuliano Medalha
Think this think is not available yet for acx5048 Only september ... I will check for you Sent from my iPhone > On May 12, 2016, at 18:22, Aaron wrote: > > Anyone ever try to virtual chassis (2) ACX5048's together into one ? > > > > -Aaron > >

[j-nsp] ACX5048 - Virtual Chassis

2016-05-12 Thread Aaron
Anyone ever try to virtual chassis (2) ACX5048's together into one ? -Aaron ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

2016-05-12 Thread raf
Packet mode is working in srx1500 ? This box is pretty new, and on the paper look a very versatile toolbox. -- Raphael Mazelier Le 12/05/2016 à 16:46, Giuliano Medalha a écrit : It is an excelent option We are testing it like metro router righ now It has a lot of good mpls/vpls

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

2016-05-12 Thread Giuliano Medalha
It is an excelent option We are testing it like metro router righ now It has a lot of good mpls/vpls implementation ( packet mode ) and works fine Good interfaces layout But the problem is related to the business unit ... Of this box The main function is ng firewall and not metro router When

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

2016-05-12 Thread Roger Wiklund
What about the new SRX1500, x86 platform, 2m routes: https://www.juniper.net/assets/us/en/local/pdf/datasheets/1000551-en.pdf On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: >> From: Colton Conor [mailto:colton.co...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

2016-05-12 Thread Adam Vitkovsky
> From: Colton Conor [mailto:colton.co...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 7:30 PM > To: Adam Vitkovsky > Cc: Satish Patel; Aaron; jnsp list; Vincent Bernat > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model > > I don't think that is correct Adam. The ASR903 does not hold full routes, and > the MX104

Re: [j-nsp] EX4600 Vs QFX 5100 VS ACX 5048

2016-05-12 Thread Colton Conor
Adam, I think because of the price point of the ASR903 just is not there. These Juniper ACX5048's can be bought for under $5,000 new. The ASR903 with a hefty discount was in the $15k range with like one line card. Even if you fully populated the 903 it wouldn't have the same amount of ports as a

Re: [j-nsp] EX4600 Vs QFX 5100 VS ACX 5048

2016-05-12 Thread Adam Vitkovsky
Wondering why no one mentioned ASR903 with RSP3. It can do 100GE per slot (8x10Ge/2x40GE/1x100GE) and there are 6 slots. Two RSPs two PSUs (only FAN tray is single point of failure). And feature wise it should do everything that ASR920 does. Compared to Juniper the only drawback is the FIB scale

Re: [j-nsp] CGNat PBA - MX104 w/MS-MIC

2016-05-12 Thread Aaron
Yes these are syslog traps as they arrive at my syslog server... they are sent from the MX104 running cgnat. This is good info that I cannot change that embedded utc time stamp on the cgnat syslog trap. Thanks Alex -Aaron ___ juniper-nsp mailing

Re: [j-nsp] EX4600 Vs QFX 5100 VS ACX 5048

2016-05-12 Thread Aaron
Hi Colton, Q1 - Have you tested any of the OAM features on the ACX5048 like Y.1564, 802.3ah, 802.1ag, Y.1731, Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) and RFC2544? A1 – no, but we do have a CFM effort underway for getting to know CFM better and understand how to architect

Re: [j-nsp] CGNat PBA - MX104 w/MS-MIC

2016-05-12 Thread Alexander Arseniev
Hello, These are taken from MX104 Routing Engine logs, correct? If yes then "2016-05-11 16:19:58" is added by syslogd on RE. And "2016-05-11 21:19:57" is WELF timestamp in syslog message from MS-MIC. MS-MIC always keeps UTC timezone and this cannot be changed. HTH Thx Alex On 11/05/2016 23:08,