pic Y bandwidth 10g).
Regards,
Wojciech
czw., 29 sie 2019 o 23:40 Jeff Meyers mailto:jeff.mey...@gmx.net>> napisał(a):
Hi Jim,
thanks for the quick reply! However, unfortunately that did not do the
job and the interface still doesn't show up, neither with 1g nor
10g
s fpc pic tunnel-services bandwidth <10g - 100g>
Be advised that this will burn a 10 gig port for each 10 gigs you assign to
tunnel-services.
Regard,
Clay Haynes
Sent from my iPhone
On 29 Aug 2019, at 10:50, Jeff Meyers wrote:
Hi list,
I'm trying to setup a GRE tunnel interface
Hi list,
I'm trying to setup a GRE tunnel interface on a MX480 with DPCE
linecards. I want to use xe-5/4/0 and have therefore configured this
interface under 'edit chassis' for tunnel-services. The interface
vanishes as expected. I have then configured the interface gr-5/4/0 with
unit 0 but is no
Thanks, worked!
Am 21.12.2018 um 02:05 schrieb Olivier Benghozi:
PR1270686
restart statistics-service
Le 21 déc. 2018 à 01:23, Jeff Meyers a écrit :
Dec 21 01:20:40 fra4-cr2 mib2d[67435]: SNMP_EVLIB_FAILURE: PFED ran out of
transfer credits with PFE.Failed to get stats. ifl index: 373
I
Hi,
we had a faulty DPCE-R in an older MX240 a few days ago and replaced it
during operation. Since inserting the spare module, we cannot snmp query
the device anymore and seeing those entries a lot:
Dec 21 01:20:25 fra4-cr2 mib2d[67435]: SNMP_EVLIB_FAILURE: PFED ran out
of transfer credits
Hi Adam,
LACP packets (so called slow packets in the linux kernel) are never
forwarded by the bridging code. If it didn't change in the last ~2
years, you will have to hack your kernel in order to let them pass. It's
actually only a minor change in a couple of lines. The same applies btw
to S
show chassis cfeb0 (or alike) is the most interesting info since it
shows the SRAM usage on this very, very old machine. This is what
actually limits the number of routes in the FIB. But 96% on the RE is
not funny either and a replacement should be scheduled on short notice.
Best is to skip the
Hi,
I also have 2 x EX4550 in VC with storm-control enabled, but it never
happens to me to get that message on commit;
I have this configuration for storm-control:
set ethernet-switching-options storm-control interface all
I am wondering what is your configuration for the ae2.0 interface:
ca
Hello everybody,
we are having a kind of strange haviour here. It's not really an issue
but at least a curiousity. On a couple of EX4550 in VC we have
storm-control enabled. This works fine so far. But on every commit, we
see a "storm-control in effect" message in our logs:
Jan 26 11:50:45
default), it will probably work around it efficiently...
Suggestion for your ae config:
aggregated-ether-options {
link-speed 10g;
lacp {
active;
periodic slow;
}
}
Le 30 oct. 2015 à 14:38, Jeff Meyers mailto:jeff.mey...@gmx.net>> a écrit :
Hi eve
Hi everybody,
yesterday we had a very small hickup on a bunch of EX4550 doing Layer2
only in a Virtual-Chassis. According to the logfiles, there were some
LACP changes on multiple independent channels on various fpcs so I
couldn't spot just one VC member as a source.
Now, just 1 hour ago, I
Thank's for clearification, that helps. So the SCB itself is only
responsible for the available bandwidth per slot but is not and will
never be a memory limitation?
Best,
Jeff
Am 22.07.2015 um 23:51 schrieb Chris Kawchuk:
On 23/07/2015, at 1:30 AM, Jeff Meyers wrote:
yes, we di
Hi,
thanks for the hint, didn't know about that option. This will certainly
safe us if we are running in to limits. We don't have too many filters,
mostly the basic stuff to protect the RE and a few filters on some vlans
with basic white- and/or blacklisting. So really nothing fance although
Hi,
I see you're running DPC cards, have you considered shifting those
links onto an MPC/Trio Card? (newer chip, more RAM, more horsepower,
yadda yadda yadda =)..) DPC was EOL a while ago, and everything has
been Trio (and now Trio-NG on the new -NG cards coming out now). As
the FIB is pushed to
grade?
Best Regards,
-Phil
On Jul 21, 2015, at 7:23 PM, Jeff Meyers wrote:
Hi Phil,
sure:
{master}
jeff@cr0> show configuration | display set | match rpf-check
{master}
nico@FRA4.cr0> show version
Hostname: cr0
Model: mx480
JUNOS Base OS boot [11.4R9.4]
JUNOS Base OS Software Suite [11.4
multiple routing instances, this also can contribute
to the problem.
Best Regards,
-Phil Rosenthal
On Jul 21, 2015, at 6:56 PM, Jeff Meyers wrote:
Hello list,
we seem to be running into limits with a MX480 with RE-2000 and 2x DPCE-4XGE-R
since we are seeing these new messages in the sysl
Hello list,
we seem to be running into limits with a MX480 with RE-2000 and 2x
DPCE-4XGE-R since we are seeing these new messages in the syslog:
Jul 22 00:50:36 cr0 fpc0 RSMON: Resource Category:jtree
Instance:jtree0-seg0 Type:free-dwords Available:83072 is less than LWM
limit:104857, rsmo
Hi Tore,
However these intial IGMP membership reports are not forwarded to the
EX4550, as it is not a multicast-router interface (from the EX4200s'
points of view, at least). So the EX4550 won't be able to learn of the
existence of the multicast group at all. Also, since the uplink to the
EX4550
Hi list,
I hope to get some experience and tips from you regarding the usage of a
Proxmox cluster using Multicast in a (juniper-based) network. Since our
multicast experience is quite low and was never required before Proxmox
became quickly popular and is meanwhile widely used by our customer,
Hi Matt,
conf t
fault-finder broadcast-storm
sorry should be "fault-finder broadcast-storm sensitivity high"
I think the ProCurve-proprietary "loop-protect" on the downstream port
of the 2824 might be a better fit here.
See eg
http://larsmichelsen.com/monitoring/hp-procurve-network-lo
Hi Patrick,
The problem is that any broadcast packets across the loop get amplified
pretty quickly and this propagates across the entire broadcast domain
(all related switches that have trunks containing affected vlans for
transit).
of course, I always forget the 3rd party broadcasts when talk
Hi Alex,
I think we are missing some important details here.
AFAIK, in order to detect MAC moves, the port must be in a
bridge-domain/VPLS instance.
So Your MX480 ae0 must be a L2/"bridged" port, not a L3/routed one.
yes, that is the case - historically actually. In the past we migrated
from
Hi David,
Once you draw your diagram correctly you'll see what you're up against
(and it ain't pretty).
Juniper MX480 no RSTP
||
ae0
||
Juniper EX4550 VC RSTP bridge id 0
||
ae0
||
Juniper EX4200 VC RSTP bri
Hi Michele,
So STP didn't protect you and you faced the loop.
okay, but how is this a loop from the perspective of the switches in the
higher levels? The Procurve sees packets coming in from the same port
where they were sent out. Isn't that by definition not a loop?
When the loop occurs
Hello everybody,
I'm writing to this list because I can't seem to find the reason for
what we saw twice meanwhile. Here is the setup:
Juniper MX480no RSTP
||
ae0
||
Juniper EX4550 VC RSTP bridge id 0
||
ae0
||
Juniper E
I'm not aware of any inherent loop protection when running a VC setup that
substitutes for STP.
This is not the case. VC is being used as well as RSTP. VC for the 3
virtual-chassis configuration (seperate from each other, one VC with 2x
EX4550 and 2x VC with 2x EX4200) and RSTP for the typical
Hi everybody,
recently we saw a strange bahviour in our network. A customer with a
Proxmox server had a Windows 2k8 VM with 2 virtual NICs (both bridged to
eth0 of the server which faces the internet) and bridged them together
INSIDE the VM. This caused immediately high latency and partial
pa
Hello list,
I'm currently a little stuck and might need some help in order to decide
how to improve the current setup. We are running a network where all
customer vlans are bridged because the same Vlan is usually required in
different areas in the network. This is the setup:
Room A:
Truman Boyes schrieb:
Hi,
thanks for your answer so far.
You then need to define a route-distinguisher, and route targets (or
simply vrf-target under the VRF) to import/export the routes for this
VPN from other PEs.
Can you provide an example for that? That would be a L3VPN, right? Why
wou
Hi,
we currently have a small number of PoPs, each equippped with a Juniper
M-series router. On each PoP we use a local Vlan 100 for the management
with RFC1918 ip adresses - 192.168.0.0/16.
Unfortunately, this results in scalability problems as the network grows
since it's not possible to m
Hi list,
is it possible to mix AC and DC power supplies in M10 and/or M20 routers?
Thanks,
Jeff
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Pekka Savola schrieb:
Hi,
> Strictly speaking, you don't need full tables from upstream. For
> example, a default route or default + some more specifics is also OK.
of course, yes. But for a little traffic engineering we prefere
full-tables here :-)
> In your simple setup, you don't necessar
Prasanna Kumar A.S schrieb:
Hi,
> I guess your topology with two m10s will look this
>
> Uplink1 - +---+ - +-+
> Uplink2 - | M10 1 |ae0| Core-Switch | - Customers
> +---+ - + |
> | |
> Uplink1 - +---+ - +
Hello list,
we operate a relatively small network with one Juniper M10 router for
everything. Since availability becomes more and more important, we want
to raise this by installing a second M10 with VRRP.
Our current setup is pretty simple:
Uplink1 - +-+ - +-+
Uplink2 - | M10
34 matches
Mail list logo