On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 14:25, Tobias Heister
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 18.04.2019 10:13, Adam Chappell wrote:
> > But the abstraction seems to be incomplete. The method of copying routes
> to
> > bgp.l3vpn.0 is similar if not identical, under-the-hood, to the initial
> > rib-group operation I am perfor
Hi,
short answer: it depends :-)
It is done in hardware, and for "sane" filters will work at line rate (e.g.
I have built a setup where few hundred GBit/s are forwarded using FBF on
MX960 with multiple MPC7E). However, if you use lots of exotic match
conditions and/or excessively long filter term
I've deployed a number of SRX3xx devices, with good results.
Features I've used on that platform include OSPF, IPsec S2S VPN,
L2-transparent mode, clustering. Some of the devices are now in production
for 3+ months, running stable and no issues seen so far.
When migrating from SRX1xx/2xx, you migh
Hi,c
> My testing has shown the following with regards to queue commands:
DPC:
-Rate-limit: works as expected, queue is policed.
note that support of "rate-limit" on "regular" DPC (non EQ types)
is relatively new (added in 10.x?).
-Exact: Not supported
did you test this on "regular" DPC (
On 26.12.2011 16:49, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Monday, December 26, 2011 11:23:38 PM vaibhava varma
wrote:
I was wondering whether mLDP with Junos has been out of
roadmap and now ready for field deployment ?
mLDP showed up in Junos 11.2:
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos11.2/topics/exam
Hi,
On 24.08.2011 09:12, Thomas Eichhorn wrote:
Hi all,
I just discussed the following with my SE:
I wanted to get new 64Bit REs with some new gear,
but run the 32-Bit JunOS on them - he denied that
this is possible.
I tried to research that, but have not yet found
something in the docs - doe
On 06.04.2011 04:12, Erik Muller wrote:
Anybody have any experience (positive or negative) they can share with
the new RE-S-1800X*? I'm looking at an upcoming MX purchase, and for the
price it's tough to justify sticking with the tried-and-true 1300 or
2000 in favor of the new REs ... unless the
On Thu, February 4, 2010 18:42, Eric Van Tol wrote:
> Hi all,
> We just took shipment of some MX960s and MX240s for a much needed network
> upgrade. They came shipped with 10.0R2.10. This seems to be the latest
> and greatest version of JUNOS. The question is, is anyone currently
> running it an
On Tue, December 29, 2009 08:31, Pekka Savola wrote:
> [..]
> The spec says forming adjacencies SHOULD typically be blocked, but
> there's a lot of text there so read the full story:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-generic-05#section-4.1
To me it seems that this particular point is cur
On Mon, December 14, 2009 11:20, Martin Levin wrote:
> Ah, unfortunately that's no longer exactly true.
>
> Juniper doesn't vendor lock, all vendors work (sort of, I had trouble
> with certain XFPs in EX4200 so buyer beware!) but certain functions
> might not. As of now the only thing they have loc
On Fri, February 27, 2009 14:12, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Anyone notice what looks like an RE memory leak/usage growth
> post a JunOS 9.4R1.8 upgrade?
we experienced a similar problem on various gear (MX/M/T) with 9.4R1.8.
symptoms are either rpd crashing with malloc failure, or rpd getting
On Tue, October 28, 2008 20:17, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 08:28:38AM +0100, Nicolas DEFFAYET wrote:
>> I'm currently running 9.2 and IRB interfaces on MX work fine for me. I
>> have only unicast traffic.
>>
>> 9.2R2.15 have broken interface counters (CLI and SNMP) on in
On Mon, October 20, 2008 08:45, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Monday 20 October 2008 14:20:57 shariq qamar wrote:
>
>> Can anyone ever use CISCO RR with juniper PE's in mpls
>> Backbone ? I have a question is it possible to run
>> Komplella L2VPN on the above mention network type where
>> we have
>> RR r
On Thu, September 18, 2008 23:49, Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a new MX480 here, equipped with only
>
>1 x quad 10GE blade
>3 x power supplies
>
> So this is a pretty unloaded box. To start with, only two of the 10GE
> ports are going to have optics inserted.
>
> I'm trying to work
Hi list,
is it possible to specify which local IP address a router will
use for originating DNS queries, either globally or per name server?
JunOS is 8.5R1.14 on J6350.
Couldn't find anything related in the tech docs, and there don't seem
to be suitable config options in the "system name-server"
[resending this to the list, lets see if it gets through now]
> http://www.mail-archive.com/juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net/msg01686.html.
> I upgraded the code on the device to 8.5R1.14 and now am seeing other
> issues related to the reporting of CPU usage. So my question is can
> anybody lend any
16 matches
Mail list logo
