Re: [j-nsp] Advertise inactive route EBGP session

Hi Mileto, Maybe you need to change the default preference of static route to value major (as 180 or 200) , with this the bgp route will be preference over static route. Best regards, --- David On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Mileto Tales wrote: > Hello, > > >

Re: [j-nsp] how to disconnect/kill tcp session from juniper router

Hi Aaron, When a telnet session is established, the process is not a telnetd dameon after the process pass to cli process. You should be filter with grep comand looking for "cli". Check my example: *** tecnologia@MX240-2_LAB-RE0> show

Re: [j-nsp] MX 14.2R7 / PR1177571

Hi all, I have the same issue but only in RE-2000, in the RE-18000-x4 this alarm don't appeared. I found this PR1207864 where said that this issue is a false positive. I had reviewed this alarms into RE-2000, and I had noted that the partition(ad2) was mounted correctly, I think that the SW is

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

Hi Aaron, I think that the message error is because the block-size of PBA. According the best practice the block-size would be power of 2 (check the link http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos14.1/topics/concept/nat-best-practices.html#jd0e110 ). To read the best practice and try again.

[j-nsp] Junos PyEz on Solaris 10.

Hi all, I am testing the Junos Automation with PyEZ, I have installed it in Ubuntu and work fine. But my customer have Desktop PC with Solaris 10 and they want to test this library of Junos Python on their PC. Then, I had reviewed the documentation about this but it don't show me nothing about

Re: [j-nsp] Question about 100 Gbps MPC4E

Hi Giuliano, If you read the documentation, the option of SA-Multicast is to interoperability between MPC4E and PIC 100G FPC4 (Juniper Devices). And it is because the PIC 100G for FPC4 have 2 PFE of 50Gbps. If you have gone to connect MX and ASR to 100G, you need to use vlan-steering

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 port-mirror config

Hi Mattew, You are using port-mirror for layer3 traffic (in your filter you are using family inet) , if you want to do mirroring to layer2 traffic, you need to use bridge-domain and put the filter in the family bridge. In the next link, you can check differents type of layer2 mirroring.

Re: [j-nsp] 6pe between Cisco and Juniper

Hi Mihai, I think that you scheme is a topology of IPv6 over cloud IPv4. If you want to test 6PE over this scenary you need configure some steps: 1.- Configure family inet6 on interfaces CE-facing and Core. 2.- Configure on protocols mpls: ipv6-tunneling 3.- Configure on protocols bgp:

Re: [j-nsp] dual stack bandwidth limitation on E-series

Hi Roman, About your question, the LM10 for E320 and E120 don't support, for the moment, external-parent group, this feature should be for the release 14.1.x of JunoSE. In my case, we are using QoS profile to limit the downstream traffic and the limit of upstream will be done in the DSLAM. Hope

Re: [j-nsp] bgp ipv6 route problem

Hi bruno, I am working the Junos 10.4R9.2 and I have both scheme 6PE and 6VPE. I read the comments and I think that you need to configure the command ipv6-tunneling inside the protocols mpls. This command permit to install the route of IPv6 and forward the traffic of IPv6. Best regards, ---

Re: [j-nsp] Decode $9$ encrypted Junos secrets

Thanks Matt, This is a good tool. Best regards, --- David On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Matt Hite li...@beatmixed.com wrote: Greetings, Threw this together a few days ago to recover $9$ encrypted Junos passwords (RADIUS secrets, BGP MD5's, etc.). It is ported from this Perl library:

[j-nsp] Monitoring interface 100G by MRTG

Hi guys, We have a new interfaces 100G into T1600 and to appeared the question about: what is the best way to monitor the 100G interface??. First option to monitor the booth interfaces et- and the second option to monitor only the LAG interface. Someone could recommend me, what option is the

[j-nsp] Bad time and date on firewall log.

Hi guys, I was testing the firewall filter over a MX960 with release 10.4R1.9 and I noted that time and date of the firewall logs was wrong. I am doing an upgrade to release 10.4R4.5 and the issue continue.

Re: [j-nsp] RE : Bad time and date on firewall log.

[ juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] de la part de David Lockuan [ dlock...@gmail.com] Date d'envoi : mercredi 8 juin 2011 19:52 À : juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Objet : [j-nsp] Bad time and date on firewall log. Hi guys, I was testing the firewall filter over a MX960 with release 10.4R1.9

Re: [j-nsp] RE : RE : RE : Bad time and date on firewall log.

-ftgroup.com [david@orange-ftgroup.com] Date d'envoi : mercredi 8 juin 2011 23:01 À : David Lockuan Cc : juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Objet : [j-nsp] RE : RE : Bad time and date on firewall log. yep ! So I guess you don't use NTP. Try this : edit ex set system ntp boot-server

Re: [j-nsp] ISIS between ERX 1440 and MX960

Hi David, Could you try to put the authentication with md5? I say this because when I was doing interoperability between JunOS and IOS, I noted that the simple authentication don't work correctly. Maybe the hash-key is not compatible when you use the simple authentication. Now we are using md5

Re: [j-nsp] MX-series Redundant RE - Unable to mask fxp0 down alarm

Hi Chris, I have a MX960 with Junos 10.4R1.9 and I have the same problem, I have to do a restart of chassis-control process and the alarmas was cleared. I hope to have help you. --- David On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Brent Jones br...@servuhome.net wrote: On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:00 PM,

Re: [j-nsp] Multiple LAG Groups / Common Layer3 Routing

Hi Paul, Yes, you need to create a bridge domains with respective vlan or vlan's. Then you insert the aeX on the bridgde domain. If you need to apply routing on this bridge, you need to create a irb interface and configure in the bridge the routing-interface. Best regards, On Tue, Apr 5,

Re: [j-nsp] 64-bit Junos Install Media

Hi Martin, From the price-list of today, I have been reviewing that there are only RE of 64bit for T1600 and T640. These are the models of RE's: RE-DUO-C1800-8G-BB Routing engine with dual core 1800MHz processor, SSD and 8GB memory, Base Bundle T1600, T640 RE-DUO-C1800-8G-R Routing engine

Re: [j-nsp] l3vpn help needed

Hi Vlad, Maybe you need to review to this link: http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/2010-October/018150.html Here we are taking the topic about the use of vrf-table-label. Best regards, David. On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:01 PM, b...@paulen.net b...@paulen.net wrote: Hi, I was

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper QoS Using AS Match

Hello Friend, I agree with Chris, in any network environment that you have and are using the QPPB of Cisco. For interoperability with equipments Juniper, you need to use the configuration of SCU/DCU from JunOS, they are arrays of policies where you can select some parameters of BGP and applied to

[j-nsp] OAM CFM over logical-systems.

Hi all, I am testing OAM CFM with MX960 and JunOS version 10.0R4.7, but when I tried to configure over logical-system, I don't have the option of oam in the hierarchy level of protocols: *** {master}[edit logical-systems

Re: [j-nsp] Files tcpdump of Junos on Wireshark.

adding the switch helps? On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, David Lockuan dlock...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, I was testing the hidden command of JunOS, monitor traffic write-file name_files interface xx-X/X/X. In theory, this files is with format tcpdump but when I try to see with Wireshark

[j-nsp] Files tcpdump of Junos on Wireshark.

Hi guys, I was testing the hidden command of JunOS, monitor traffic write-file name_files interface xx-X/X/X. In theory, this files is with format tcpdump but when I try to see with Wireshark, it don't show me on detail of the packet. I see that the wireshark detect a protocol juniper, I don't

Re: [j-nsp] RSTP over logical-system.

ID : 8192.80:71:1f:8c:7f:d0 Extended system ID : 0 On 11/2/10 7:08 PM, David Lockuan dlock...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, I'm testing the protocols rstp over logical-systems, but when I set the priority over one interface for it work as root

[j-nsp] RSTP over logical-system.

Hi guys, I'm testing the protocols rstp over logical-systems, but when I set the priority over one interface for it work as root, it is not change the status in the protocols rstp and the other interface don't change to Blocking. theirs always keep on Forwarding state. The topology that I am

Re: [j-nsp] Problem of Forwarding on VPN using vrf-table-label.

Hi Cristian, It is correct, I had 2 PE with 2 VPN. Sorry I don't send the configuration of both PE's. Just now I send you the both configurations. I noted that when I used the command vrf-table-label the next-hop after the label lookup is to next-table of the VPN and when I don't used it the

[j-nsp] Problem of Forwarding on VPN using vrf-table-label.

Hi guys, I have been doing a lab with a MX960 with release 10.0R3.10, I set a topology with logical-systems, in theory all it is working because I can see the routes of VRF into table bgp.l3vpn.0 but the forwarding between the CE is not working. This is the configuration of the routing-instance