John did you google this?
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/general/mic-mx-series-40-gigabit-ethernet-qsfp.html
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 5:59 PM John Brown wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a client that is wanting a 40Gig ether handoff. What would
>
> On 19/07/2019, at 1:26 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> Is there a reason to not do 4x10G or 1x100G? It’s cheap enough these days.
>
> If they’re in-datacenter I can maybe understand 40G but outside the DC it’s
> unclear to me why someone would do this.
40G doesn’t have potential hashing
Is there a reason to not do 4x10G or 1x100G? It’s cheap enough these days.
If they’re in-datacenter I can maybe understand 40G but outside the DC it’s
unclear to me why someone would do this.
- Jared
> On Jul 18, 2019, at 6:58 PM, John Brown wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have a client that is wanting
Hi,
I have a client that is wanting a 40Gig ether handoff. What would
folks recommend for
an interface on a MX480 system?
The customer is also asking if we need to handle G.709 FEC
Thoughts and tips appreciated.
--
Respectfully,
John Brown, CISSP
Managing Member, CityLink
Hello
Some important information:
Top level encapsulation flex-eth and flex-vlan-tagging is not supported on
QFabric (QFX family) devices. That means you can't use a port that does ccc
with any other type of encap, i.e. vlan-bridge, ext-vlan-br, or set family inet
on a unit. Only MX with trio
Yes there is no equivalent MX Services to SPC3 at this time, but this is being
worked on. This is supposed to be coming in 19.3, via software only; new SW
architecture.
Many [large] customers are running large scale IPSEC termination, but 5G max,
from what [little] I know. If someone needs
Hi,
Tried as follows;
liam@NA-QFX5110-1# show interfaces xe-0/0/9
description "Temp Link to Arista";
vlan-tagging;
mtu 9216;
encapsulation flexible-ethernet-services;
unit 123 {
encapsulation vlan-ccc;
vlan-id 123;
input-vlan-map pop;
output-vlan-map push;
family ccc;
}
Is anyone using the ms-mpc for large scale IPSEC termination? above 10G?
Data shows 16-24Gps per card 4-6 per NPU. I am interested in real world
performance with IMIX. The new SPC3 cards look promising - 40Gbps per slot
IMIX juniper marketing data, I dont think these cards are released yet for
Try Alain's recommendation. I completely forgot about the input/output
vlan part. You should have it on the MX as well, so that VLAN 123 would
be transmitted over the l2circuit.
xe- {
description
flexible-vlan-tagging;
mtu 9216;
encapsulation flexible-ethernet-services;
Hi,
That removed my ability to run bridge interfaces on xe-0/0/9, which might
cause me some design issues further down the track for production
deployments.
Applied this config, but same result.
liam@NA-QFX5110-1# show interfaces xe-0/0/9
description "Temp Link to Arista";
vlan-tagging;
mtu
Here is an production version (thx Phil) but on QFX-5100 and MX960
(and MX104 before).
This works for about 200ish circuits so far...
We had a bunch of issue with those which can lead to unresponsive
interface... So depending on your situation you may have to reboot the
switch
I’m only aware of that being an issue when vlan bridge encapsulation is enabled
on the PHY:
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/reference/general/mpls-limitations-qfx-series.html
(There may, of course, be other cases too that are documented elsewhere)
In any event, this
Try below on QFX5110 terminating l2circuit. Last I remember the
flexible-vlan-tagging + flexible-ethernet-services behaves oddly on the
QFX5110.
delete interfaces xe-0/0/9 flexible-vlan-tagging
set interfaces xe-0/0/9 vlan-tagging
set interfaces xe-0/0/9 encapsulation vlan-ccc
Heng Chai, Tan
Hi,
Not sure if I'm "doing the dumb" or Junos bug or limitation of the QFX /
Trident 2+ chip-set.
Trying to do a basic l2circuit as follows
VLAN Tagged Interface > MX204 l2circuit / ldp > QFX-5110 / ldp > QFX-5110
l2circuit / ldp > VLAN Tagged Interface
What I am seeing is traffic going Test
I wish there was a more elegant way, but when we approached JTAC and our
Juniper SE about it. They confirmed it was the only method, which meant we
were burning twice as many security zones per client L3VPN -> IPSEC tunnel
service. My email search fu is failing in finding the kb article on it.
On
15 matches
Mail list logo
