Re: [j-nsp] L2 VPNs configuration

I've tried to use unit 1024 (as it fits in the range described) and when I do a commit check I get the following error: [EMAIL PROTECTED] commit check [edit interfaces ge-0/0/1] 'unit 1024' Only unit 0 is valid for this encapsulation error: configuration check-out failed You are right. W

Re: [j-nsp] L2 VPNs configuration

Hi Eugeniu, I see 2 mistake in your configuration : - you use the same route-distinguisher on the pe-1 and pe-2 - the interface connected to ce-1 / ce-2 is configured with the unit 0. In Junos you have to use unit from 512 to 4095 to the ccc encapsulation. Once you have change this said us if it

Re: [j-nsp] load balancing between juniper routers for unequal cost path

Hi, Which kind of load balancing do you want to do ? layer 3 ? layer 4 ? Are you on a MPLS network ? Regards, Samuel Hamid Ahmed a écrit : > Hi Everyone, > > CAn anyone suggest me how to load balancing between juniper routers for > unequal cost paths. > > BR// > HA > > ___

Re: [j-nsp] l2circuit for frame relay

Hi Amos, Just to complete the excellent answer of Sean. In the documentation I can read : "Like Ethernet interfaces, a Frame Relay interface requires the specification of CCC encapsulation at both the device and logical unit levels. When the device is set to support CCC encapsulation, Frame Re

Re: [j-nsp] VPLS tunnel LSP establishment

I suppose that you use RSVP protocol to etablish the LSP. You can use the interface address or the router ID. I advise you to use router ID for a reason of scalability. Regards, Samuel Monika M a écrit : > site1---PE1 - P1---P2---(x)-PE2site2 > > I have BGP peering betwee

Re: [j-nsp] Graceful restart for BGP-VPLS

On the Juniper website I can read : "VPLS graceful restart allows you to continue forwarding VPLS traffic across the core MPLS network even if one of the routers in the forwarding path restarts. Graceful restart for VPLS functions the same way as Layer 2 VPN graceful restart. To configure grac

[j-nsp] MPLS and VPN-L3 topology : "vrf-table-label" and "graceful-restart"

Hi group, I am configuring a MPLS - VPN-L3 topology and I would like to use the "vrf-table-label" statement. Do you know if the configuration of the "vrf-table-label" leads to an additional CPU load on the PE routers (M7i and M10i) ? The performances of this kind of routers could be affected ?