Re: [j-nsp] ATM config

-summary169.html#1015803 router-a-router-c { interface so-1/0/0.1; interface so-2/0/0.2; } } mpls { interface all; } } On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Clue Store cluest...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, I have a situation where I need to take

[j-nsp] uRPF and 0.0.0.0/0

Hi All, Trying to get uRPF working in strict mode and seems to be working fine (other than the fact i'm just accepting all traffic via my fail-filter). As I was searching the archives, I found this thread which still doesn't make it clear about a default route.

Re: [j-nsp] uRPF and 0.0.0.0/0

* Filters: Input: netflow, Output: netflow Addresses, Flags: Is-Preferred Is-Primary On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net wrote: On Aug 25, 2009, at 9:51 PM, Clue Store wrote: Does this config hose up uRPF (either loose or strict)?? There's an 'allow-default

[j-nsp] m10i Nastiness Friday night

Hi All, Last friday we had some nastiness on one of our m10i's. As I am not a Juniper expert, I was wondering if someone could decipher the log messages and determine if is possibly a CFEB issue, or just a fluke Junos issue and whether I should do anything or let it be and see if it does it

Re: [j-nsp] m10i Nastiness Friday night

: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:57 AM To: Clue Store Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] m10i Nastiness Friday night It looks like CFEB dumped core and restarted. Please open a JTAC case and let me them figure out what went wrong with CFEB. Please gather all logs around

[j-nsp] Virtual Firewall Security Appliances

Hi List, My team and I have been quite attched to our C ASA/PIX boxen up until this past week. My VP of Ops purchased a shiny new ASA 5550 with 50 context licenses. As I am reading up on the configuration of the multiple context mode, I discover that wow, NO VPN SUPPORT in MULTIPLE CONTEXT