On 23/3/23 2:27 am, Tom Storey via juniper-nsp wrote:
My thought is one PEM on one phase, such that if that phase drops, you drop
that PEM entirely. Or is it worthwhile spreading across phases to keep even
half of a PEM alive and supplying the chassis?
Start by going back to "if that phase
My home EX2200-C has started logging a few kernel errors per hour,
persisting after a reboot, and an upgrade to the latest 14.1 release
(I'd have tried a downgrade to the latest 12.3 release suggested, except
that release isn't available to me on the download site for some reason)
/kernel:
On 02/10/18 20:26, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 13:21, Julien Goodwin wrote:
>
>> The trouble is, some providers might use a bit to mean something like
>> "prefer cheap EU paths" for Asia->AU traffic, leaving it set then causes
>> hundreds o
On 02/10/18 20:10, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Hey Mark,
>
>> We remark all incoming Internet traffic DSCP values to 0.
>>
>> A few years ago, not doing this led to issues where customers were handling
>> the DSCP values in such a way that any traffic marked as such was being
>> dropped. Took weeks
On 19/04/18 19:14, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Anyone up for some IETF fun? I think this PW problem can be mostly
> solved by an standard API. I imagine that you have some credentials
> wallet which supports the API, browser which supports the API and HTTP
> server which supports the API. You have some
On 18/04/18 17:52, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 08:37:51AM +0100, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
>> Ha, I really wish Juniper would look at what XR did on whole host of things
>> :)
>
> Judging from the recent threads on JunOS upgrade pains, seems they did...
>
>
On 11/04/18 19:31, Saku Ytti wrote:
> I suspect more correct reason is that they don't see sufficient market
> potential in device like MX104. I think Cisco and Juniper are very
> confused about market, they appear to think entire market consists
> solely of large scale DC providers. That only
On 05/04/18 05:09, Niall Donaghy wrote:
> Even more sad to see that 1G ports retain their xe- naming rather than
> changing to ge- as you would hope and expect.
Isn't the first time that's happened, IIRC 10g PICs on T640s presented
as ge-x/x/x.
Newer kit seemed to be converging on et-x/x/x for
On 26/03/18 17:31, Chris Adams wrote:
> Got an MX204 - all the things left running on the Wind River Linux VM
> host are pretty embarrassing (even if there's no actual network access
> and so not a security issue). I have no need on a router for RPC, BIND,
> Gluster, NFS, Zeroconf, Postfix, or
Somehow I've had stable power at home for almost 4 years
... and also forgotten to upgrade this thing.
... or fix the now very out of date interface descriptions.
root@ex2200-c> show log messages | last
Feb 25 22:21:58 ex2200-c newsyslog[49500]: logfile turned over due to -F request
Feb 25
On 02/08/15 02:28, Chris Woodfield wrote:
TL;DR: IPv6 forwarding breaks when my DHCPv6 client lease expires, even though
CLI output claims it’s been renewed.
I have an SRX210 as my home gateway, running 12.1X46-D35.1. This is running
dual stack to Comcast, receiving a /56 DHCPv6 delegation
Because I know a bunch of juniper staff read this list.
In the datasheet for both the QFX10k PTX1k is an error, I pointed it
out back when the QFX10k launched, but it's not fixed and the PTX1k
sheet has the same error.
In both of them the Sub-Miniature B connectors used for timing have
On 18/05/15 21:49, Saku Ytti wrote:
The update-groups are created dynamically in JunOS as far as I know.
That is if you have BGP group where neighbors have unique export
policies, you will have multiple update-groups in configuration group.
But I guess if you have two neighbors with same
On 16/10/14 21:07, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2014-10-16 09:52 +0200), Sebastian Wiesinger wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
I was wondering if anyone knows where a MX router stores the boot
configuration its going to use after you load a new version of code
on the router.
a software upgrade does not
On 05/06/14 13:30, Ben Dale wrote:
On 5 Jun 2014, at 12:00 pm, Geoff Crawford geoff.crawf...@cwct.ca wrote:
Hi guys!
I'm a Juniper fan too, but I'll take a non-Juniper answer today. Seems to be
an MPLS heavily oriented list, so I figured you guys would know.
I'm sure we'd all love an
On 05/06/14 22:22, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Thursday, June 05, 2014 01:58:50 PM Julien Goodwin wrote:
Sure there's not the redundancy of a PTX, but given that
you can buy a pair of 5100's at list and I'm fairly sure
would still be cheaper than the PTX.
The issue I've always had with so-called
On 04/03/14 20:39, R S wrote:
A customer of mine runs MX960 (dual RE), SRX5800 and SRX3600 (cluster with
dual RE), EX8200 (dual RE) and EX4200 (in VC), in the weekend will run a
disaster recovery test powering off those devices.
I’d like to avoid any problem with files corruptions, which is
On 28/02/14 00:48, Phil Shafer wrote:
Sorry if I'm venturing toward shameless self promotion here, but
this really is an area we try to work at. That's part of the
movation for asking if this one specific case is sufficiently
irritating to break our own rules.
But it's not one specific case
And in a sensible form factor too.
http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/routing/cse2000/
Can think of plenty of other use cases for the box as well.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https
On 24/01/14 12:39, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
Hmmm.. Is there actually a way on Juniper to adjust the output power though?
I'm not aware of any MSA optics (SFP, XFP, GBIC, CFP, etc.) that have
controllable power levels. Certainly if you're using a transmission system
there's probably an adjustable
On 16/09/13 11:52, Laurent CARON wrote:
Current setup: 2 VCs (one on each site) each composed of 2xEX4200-24T
I have the possibility of having a redundant connection between 2
buildings distant of ~10/15 km.
The main link is a pair of dark fibers on which I'll use 40 km XFP modules.
The
Saw this come through on my RSS reader, it's worth a shout out as I'm
sure more people than just me have been wanting a branch SRX with decent
SFP density there's finally an option.
http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/routing/ln-series/ln2600/
I'm assuming it runs the same branch SRX
On 26/07/13 01:52, Doug McIntyre wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 09:01:15AM -0400, Paulhamus, Jon wrote:
Power Supply in EX3200 Switches
The power supply in EX3200 switches is a hot-removable and hot-insertable
field-replaceable unit (FRU) that you can install on the rear panel without
On 03/07/13 00:56, Darius Jahandarie wrote:
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Drew Weaver drew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
And what is wrong with the MX80 as a peering/transit router for up to 80Gbps
of traffic?
The lack of redundant REs + inability to have an external RE.
Other than the amount
something that
doesn't break on a malformed query.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo
to a request to do per-VLAN mac's.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
I upgraded a new EX2200-c to 12.3 the other day (was shipped with a broken
release of 11.4), and every hour I'm getting clearly BS traps:
CHASSISD_SNMP_TRAP6: SNMP trap generated: Power Supply Removed
(jnxContentsContainerIndex 2, jnxContentsL1Index 2, jnxContentsL2Index 1,
jnxContentsL3Index
The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description
with our loose rpf check.
spontaneous reboots aren't quite adjustable like that.
This.
Why Juniper don't implement (or scream from the rooftops if there is) an
iBGP-settle ability I don't know.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
I've just started dumping syslog on my permanent lab devices at home,
and the SRX210 is regularly throwing this:
L2ALM: trying master connection, status 61, attempt 5000
The attempt increases, but the message is only logged very rarely (this
is shortly after a reboot).
I now see this on
!!!
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp
.
I have retained domestic download access for SRX.
It's probably the new download page, there's a dropdown for domestic vs
worldwide that's a little non-obvious.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
TCP
keepalives sufficient to keep the session open.
I found any form of application keepalive sufficient.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp
On 12/11/12 16:03, Tim Eberhard wrote:
Benny,
I've been working with the SRX since before it was in beta loading it
up on a SSG550-M and netscreen previous to that. TCP keep alives, or
any tcp packet that transverses that session has ALWAYS reset the
timeout. The only time where you would
! excuse to buy a lab toy, shame
I have no money for such)
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman
On 30/10/12 20:21, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Using an open source viewer, all I see in that document is a single page
displaying
For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in
Acrobat 9 or Adobe Reader 9, or later.
and a link to Get Adobe Reader Now!. And sure enough, inspecting the
pdf
supporting it
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
.
If anyone from J is reading - please update documentation or JunOS
defaults. It would be nice to keep them in sync.
And a warning in the upgrade notes, I'm sure there's at least one site
that only uses root. (No, nobody I've every worked for has that, at
least on Juniper kit)
--
Julien Goodwin
(especially if it turns out to be operator error).
Except that Juniper pretty much built this (according to
friends-of-friends), so it's either Juniper engineer error or JunOS bug.
At the very least Juniper would be fully aware of the config.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
On 01/05/12 13:15, Naveen Nathan wrote:
I'm attempting to retire a cisco 6509 setup, replacing it with an EX4200
virtual chassis configuration (8 linecards). I've run into a warning
when committing the configuration:
warning: Exceeded vmember threshold limit, it is recommended to
have not
be expected to have
higher failure rates, at least until the first few production runs are
sold through.
As they don't have large SRAM/TCAM there shouldn't be the typical first
run of a new RAM process issues.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
On 22/05/12 23:00, JA wrote:
Hi
Can anyone please confirm if below connectivity would work with 10ge wan
phy router port at one side while other end router with stm-64 port?
No this won't work.
rtr[10ge.wan.phy] --- sdh[stm64] --- dwdm.ring --- sdh[stm64] --- rtr[stm64]
WAN-PHY doesn't
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
: fans, hard drives
- Memory
- Optical modules
Once you get past that you're into rare territory. MTBF is a horrible
measurement for network kit, you really only care if you need redundency
and if so how much, and MTBF doesn't actually tell you very much of that.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue
On 04/04/12 00:28, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
1. Show log messages
a. Look at last few days for anything suspicious
i. Interfaces flapping
show int | match flap is your friend. Also chassisd
2. Show interfaces terse
a. Anything down that shouldn’t be?
Also
/information-products/topic-collections/hardware/ptx-series//hwguide/ptx5000-hwguide.pdf
PTX PIC guide -
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/release-independent/junos/information-products/topic-collections/hardware/ptx-series/pic/ptx-series-pic.pdf
There's also a bunch of T4000 docs up now.
--
Julien
boundries as points to inject that regions self into BGP)
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman
is that you publish your
invention in a way that others can replicate once it expires (true that
rarely happens these days)
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
On 07/01/12 15:50, Salman Zahid wrote:
2. In terms of 3rd party optics support , we are evaluating the support
for 3rd party optics . Please continue to check the Juniper documentation and
talk to your account team for roadmap information .
My ire has cooled considerably since reading
On 07/01/12 13:34, Chuck Anderson wrote:
To clarify my original question, does anyone know of any such
server/storage/NIC/HBA vendors out there that insist you use their DAC
cables? I want to be sure not to buy those either, because last I
checked, you can't put SFP+ DAC Vendor A on one end
in the Control Plane
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
config in the lab and send out
RAM+CF to be upgraded on site.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net
Sonet (well, usually SDH).
Fortunately those are few enough that a lack of density compared to 10g
ethernet isn't a massive issue.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp
On 16/10/11 13:28, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
snip openflow rant
Of course the traditional router vendors are also realizing that they
won't be able to compete on price given the massive volumes that third
party ASIC makers are doing, so they've already started building systems
around
vaporware, not due to ship until the end of
the year is closer. The main threat to the T-series is that 10ge
slowly removing the need for Sonet/SDH, and if all you need is 10g
LAN-PHY the MX with the 16-port MIC does it nicely.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
On 10/10/11 23:39, Tima Maryin wrote:
Hello!
Recently RIPE NCC started to allocate addresses from 128/8 to end users,
example:
https://apps.db.ripe.net/whois/lookup/ripe/inetnum/128.0.0.0-128.0.7.255.html
inet.0:
128.0.0.0/16 orlonger -- disallowed
It's only the first
-business for someone).
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
On 08/11/11 19:00, Daniel Roesen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:29:23PM -0400, Rakesh Shetty wrote:
What I got from juniper is that the enhanced SCB will only be
supported in 11.4 which is April 2012.
We're hearing 11.4 is due end of 2011.
At the rate Juniper is slipping these days...
understand it, the flash is soldered on
similar to the EX's instead of just using an internal CF or SD slot
which would have helped.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp
for the MX80, although I
don't know if that went anywhere.
Now that they have the XRE200 what about letting us install Junos64 on
it and making it a reflector platform.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
isn't enough to make it eligible for redist), don't need to
assign it to an interface at all.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp
On 03/04/11 02:13, Jesus Alvarez wrote:
It should be trivial to implement a configurable SSH port in the Junos
True.
firmware and this would help in securing the router. Practically all
I doubt it.
scanners attempt SSH logins when port 22 is available but very few check
all available
The short answer is:
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos92/swconfig-vpns/configuring-vpls-without-a-tunnel-services-pic.html
This is meant to just need recent-ish pic's facing the MPLS cloud.
On 28/03/11 09:53, Chris Evans wrote:
All the communication that we've received from
.
If and when Juniper launch SONET MIC's I think that will be the end of
the smaller M's.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https
is hardware based, J is software based. But J seems to
support more features although they are both based on the same software.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing
On 10/03/11 16:50, Julien Goodwin wrote:
It sounds like what you really want is just an SRX (Probably 2x240, 650
or 1400).
Scratch the 240's, from the data sheet:
Maximum security zones:
- SRX240 - 32
- SRX650 - 128
- SRX3k - 256 (1k should be the same, but not listed on it's data sheet
/techpubs/hardware/junos-jseries/junos-jseries96/junos-jseries-hardware-guide/hw-hardware-features-j2320-j2350.html#hw-hardware-features-j2320-j2350
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
over the SRX240, would be far more confident
in that handling your traffic load (on the services side, forwarding
should be trivial for even an SRX100).
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 21/01/11 23:02, Timo Mallas wrote:
It would be great if somebody who has got some experience with this could
shed a little light on frequency (and ToD/phase) synchronization protocol
like Sync-E and 1588v2 support on Juniper equipment?
A customer of ours is considering to migrante from
the encapsulated traffic over the tunnel itself (JunOS will do this with
both SRX and ES-pic IPSec), static /32's can help here
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
On 19/01/11 01:35, Alexander Shikoff wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 01:20:00AM +1100, Julien Goodwin wrote:
2. Do you have a tunnel pic?
- Some quick googling does seem to confirm IPIP needs a tunnel pic
- However traffic to the RE may still work without one
I do not have it. I thought
unnumbered-address]
'lo0.0'
referred interface must have address configured under family inet
error: configuration check-out failed: (statements constraint check failed)
Which seems right, so there's clearly something special happening.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
While I'm on the topic of things which aren't quite right, why does
commiting an aggregated-sonet or ethernet connection without setting
device count (chassis - aggregated-devices) not throw at least a
warning that this will silently fail?
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
of the MX80 (Something with just the interfaces from an SRX1400-10G
would be awesome).
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
still work without alarm, at least as of 10.0R2.10.
Just remember to add some form of ejector *before* installing into the
chassis, or at least mount it next to a PE pic.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
On 23/12/10 21:34, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Julien Goodwin:
For my SRX at the office back when I installed it (9.6 IIRC) *TCP*
keepalives would not extend session timeouts, but *SSH* keepalives
worked very well, that's the ServerAliveInterval setting in OpenSSH.
Typically, TCP keepalives
.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
On 13/12/10 17:21, Amos Rosenboim wrote:
L2TP termination is not currently supported on the MX.
According to an SE I work with this is on their radar but no committed date
yet.
More to the point it's publicly advertised in the marketing materials
for the Trio boards MX80.
--
Julien Goodwin
with LNS
support?
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
On 09/11/10 20:12, Keegan Holley wrote:
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Julien Goodwin
jgood...@studio442.com.au mailto:jgood...@studio442.com.au wrote:
On 09/11/10 14:17, Keegan Holley wrote:
BGP full feed on an SRX650 is fine, if you disable flow mode
(as much
is fine with
firewalling.
Combining a full feed with firewalling is a bad idea, at least on the
branch kit, and probably the SRK1k and 3k.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper
feature working that shouldn't.
If Juniper actually delivered on their promise of IPv6 equality this
wouldn't be an issue (and that's enough for anyone who cares to figure
out what I mean).
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 09/11/10 14:17, Keegan Holley wrote:
BGP full feed on an SRX650 is fine, if you disable flow mode (as much as
you can, don't forget the ALG's).
What's the point of doing BGP on a firewall with firewallling turned off?
Because they're cheaper then the J-series.
signature.asc
of ram.
With flow-mode I've had to up ours to 3GB (above Juniper spec) at which
point they handle three full tables with plenty to spare.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https
if that's all anyone does use them for)
and so a lot of bits that are included as standard in ethernet-only gear
is on the module.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https
change?
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
On 27/07/10 18:42, Luca Tosolini wrote:
the default-lsa is not generated because of Junos 'active backbone
detection'
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos94/swconfig-routing/configuring-the-backbone-area-and-other-areas.html
Active backbone detection is implemented to
, and although it won't admit it I strongly believe
heavy memory pressures (two full feeds, plus four other feeds totalling
~50k routes on a 1GB system in 10.0R2, RAM has been ordered and the
second full feed turned off).
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description
is not supported on the MX80
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of OBrien, Will
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 7:18 AM
To: Julien Goodwin
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX80 L2TP Functions
is later,
possibly into next year.
However that was prior to actual hardware shipment and not a definitive
statement.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
be defined}} which sucks when
multiple apps are defined, {{commit check}} is fine
* Documentation is unclear re NAT pool IP addresses. I had to add the
pool address to a loopback to get things working, until then the route
was never offered.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
.
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
Julien Goodwin
Studio442
Blue Sky Solutioneering
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
96 matches
Mail list logo
