[j-nsp] merging IPv6 and IPv4 route in same policy

can we merge matching IPv6 and IPv4 routes in same config ??? for example policy-statement O-R { term 1 { from { protocol ospf; route-filter 10.0.6.0/24 orlonger; route-filter fec0:0:0:4::/64 orlonger; } then accept; }

Re: [j-nsp] merging IPv6 and IPv4 route in same policy

but in 2 different terms !!! not in same term !? I was asking about same term ?! Thanks From: Masood Ahmad Shah mas...@nexlinx.net.pk To: Ahmad Alhady ahmad.alh...@yahoo.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 8:14:11 PM Subject: RE

[j-nsp] Origin with VPN

Hi Fulks I have PE1 and PE2 connceted to CE1 and CE2 CE1 and CE2 has backdor link and are connected direct iBGP session... I want to prevent loops I assign origin in the export vrf policy for both of PEs, and reject all routes have origin from exporting it BUT still seeing

[j-nsp] PE_CE SOPF

in case of using OSPF as PE-CE routing protocol .. .. why we should assign the domain-id community to the exported routes? ?? I think that specifying domain-id under the protocols ospf hierarchy is enough to send the domain-id on the route... ? ?! ! ! another point . . . when we use

[j-nsp] policy map two routing protocol,

Hi I need to match prefix 10.10/16 from aggregate and 192.168/16 from ospf in a policy map Can I accomplish this task by the above policy ?? edit policy policy ex term 1 set from protocol aggregate set from protocol ospf set from route-filter 10.10/16 exact set from route-filter 192.168/16

[j-nsp] RSVP--- BGP

Hi all, please help me solving this issue I made a RSVP LSP between R1 and R7 which are in diffrent ISIS areas!!, I didnt disable the CSPF!! and the LSP came UP!!! root# show label-switched-path r1-r7 { to 10.0.9.7; bandwidth 10m; } interface all; [edit logical-routers R1

[j-nsp] JNCIP book, OSPF policy

Hi all, in JNCIP book there are 2 diffrent rip import policies. l...@r6# show policy-options policy-statement rip-in term 1 { from { protocol rip; next-hop 172.16.40.1; } then accept; } term 2 { then reject; } l...@r7# show policy-options policy-statement rip-in term 1 { from { protocol rip;

Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP book, OSPF policy

RIP router! am I correct ? Thanks Ahmad From: andy n...@shady.org To: Ahmad Alhady ahmad.alh...@yahoo.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 9:57:01 AM Subject: Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP book, OSPF policy The first policy matches all routes, your policy only matches RIP

Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP book, ISIS and BGP Q!

but the book asked for a route leaking for ONLY backbone routers LOs (R3, R4 and R5) !!! so iBGP will be established with ONLY R3, R4 and R5 but not with R6 and R7!! Thanks From: Cheikh-Moussa Ahmad acheikh-mou...@axians.de To: Ahmad Alhady ahmad.alh

[j-nsp] JNCIP/E-M

Hi everybody, is there any one planning to go for JNCIP-M or JNCIE-M in upcoming 4 weeks, please unicast me so we can share study tips together... Thanks Ahmad ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

[j-nsp] JNCIP book, ISIS and BGP Q!

Hi all in JNCIP book in ISIS Chapter in Miscellaneous IS-IS Knobs section they ask for the following Ensure that r2 cannot reach destinations outside of area 49.0003 while keeping all its IS-IS adjacencies up and without modifying its routing-options stanza so we will use ignore-attached-bit