Re: [j-nsp] internal traffic forwarding between instances

Hi! Seems to be working now. Thanks! I knew it was something small. Matthias Am 20.03.10 00:54, schrieb Stefan Fouant: What happens if you leak interface routes between instance1 and inet.0? Stefan Fouant --Original Message-- From: Matthias Gelbhardt Sender: juniper-nsp-boun

Re: [j-nsp] software version to use?

use this link. Login is required for the info though. https://www.juniper.net/customers/csc/software/junos_software_versions.jsp BR, Benny On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de mailto:matth...@commy.de wrote: Hi! At the moment I am configuring a bunch

[j-nsp] j-flow license problem

Hi! After some waiting we finaly received a j-flow license for a J-Series router. Today I wanted to generate a license-key but get the error Authcode enables an already existing feature or multiple authcodes enable same feature. The J-Series is running 9.3 and has the j-flow feature not

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

Has no one an idea? It seems, that I am really stuck here. Do I have to activate something on the other side (hence the AdminDown status?) Regards, Matthias Matthias Gelbhardt schrieb: Hello David, great tip. Unfortunatly BFD for BGP - though detailed documented - has no examples flying

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

router also a Juniper router? Are both peers directly connected or is this a multihop session? Try this doc link see if it can help. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos85/swconfig85-routing/id -13279139.html#id-13279139 Thanks, Nilesh. On 9/8/09 12:53 AM, Matthias Gelbhardt matth

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

a directly connected IPs or is this an indirect session? The session shows multihop on both routers from the show output provided below. What is the router platform on both sides? Thanks, Nilesh On 9/8/09 1:25 AM, Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de wrote: Hi! That is the doc I have

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

. On 9/8/09 1:40 AM, Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de wrote: Hi! No, actually they are directly connected, so I do not know, why there is a multihop output. Perhaps somehow he thinks to be not directly connected and that is the problem? Both routers are J6350. Regards, Matthias Nilesh Khambal

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

Hi! I see now only outgoing BFD packets... Perhaps I should better think about using an IGP for the internal communication. Matthias Matthias Gelbhardt schrieb: Hi! I do not understand why, but I do not see packets on the other router. But there is no icmp either, when I ping the other

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

routers ? On 9/8/09 1:07 PM, Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hi! I see now only outgoing BFD packets... Perhaps I should better think about using an IGP for the internal communication. Matthias ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] optimized switchover

firewall is causing it. How are you allowing BFD traffic into the ES box ? cheers On 9/8/09 1:27 PM, Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hi! We are using only iBGP between our routers on different locations. There is a working BGP and data-connection between the two systems. Perhaps I can somehow restart

[j-nsp] optimized switchover

Hi! I wonder what the best practices for optimized switchovers would be? I mean fast comprehension of failed BGP connections? A fibre cut or something like that, how can I be sure, that my routers are detecting the failed session as soon as possible? What would be the best practices fpr

[j-nsp] which memory show commands are important?

Hi! Something that is bothering me for some time now. What do the several memory statistics say, i.e. which are important to see how my box does? Which values are important to look at? You can give the memory for show chassis routing-engine / show task memory / and on the shell top. On a

[j-nsp] BGP session is not coming up

Hi! We have a problem with a BGP session. The session is not coming up, and I dont know why. It is a eBGP session: Log: Jul 22 08:30:08 muenster /kernel: tcp_auth_ok: Packet from x.x.x.x: 179 missing MD5 digest tracelog: Jul 22 08:50:16.426122 bgp_connect_complete: error connecting to

Re: [j-nsp] BGP session is not coming up

PM, Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de wrote: Hi! We have a problem with a BGP session. The session is not coming up, and I dont know why. It is a eBGP session: Log: Jul 22 08:30:08 muenster /kernel: tcp_auth_ok: Packet from x.x.x.x: 179 missing MD5 digest tracelog: Jul 22 08:50

Re: [j-nsp] BGP session is not coming up

Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Matthias Gelbhardt Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Juli 2009 08:56 An: juniper-nsp Betreff: [j-nsp] BGP session is not coming up Hi! We have a problem with a BGP session. The session

[j-nsp] compatible compact flash J6350

Hi! As the recommended compact flash cards are nearly impossible to get in Germany, I would like to know, if you have some other tips for compatible CF cards? Regards, Matthias ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] IPv6 best practice

routers / virtual routers / etc, if you want separation at that level. Kind regards, Truman On 25/05/2009, at 10:32 PM, Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hi! Today we received our IPv6 prefix from RIPE. There are many projects in the pipeline, so we would like to enable our network with IPv6

[j-nsp] IPv6 best practice

Hi! Today we received our IPv6 prefix from RIPE. There are many projects in the pipeline, so we would like to enable our network with IPv6 and would like to start new projects with default deployment in IPv6. What would be the best practice to bring our backbone to IPv6? Would one use a

Re: [j-nsp] DOS attack?

Hi! I may open a JTAC case, when I understand for which problem I should open one. The following has happened: The system (J6350) is running under 9.3R2.8, so we decided to update to 9.4R2.8. That was a desaster, and I hope you can help also in this matter. After upgrading the systems,

[j-nsp] DOS attack?

Hi! Last night we had a mysterious behaviour on our router. On a BGP connection with Cogent we received an unexpected EOF. There were also a great number of SSH logins (we do not have FW rules in place, but we have a rate limit, Shortly after the router complained about low memory and a

[j-nsp] traffic accounting

Hi! I am looking for an accounting solution with several J-series. Is there any way to get flows out of the J to write them in a database or something without getting the accounting licence? Someone said to me, that the juniper has build in a similar solution as ciscos ( I remember from

Re: [j-nsp] traffic accounting

Yes, minimum I need is source - target IP address and bytes. Regards, Matthias Am 10.03.2009 um 16:38 schrieb Patrik Olsson: Hello! When it comes to real flow data (v5 and v8), they will be free from JUNOS 9.5 for J series, i.e. you dont need a JFlow license. Other ways to get flowdata out

Re: [j-nsp] Update failed on J-Series

Hi! But why. I just saw in the Release notes, that the minimum flash required is 256, maximum ist 512. Regards, Matthias Am 08.03.2009 um 20:40 schrieb Patrik Olsson: Then that is the problem. cheers patrik Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hi! Perhaps the problem? The disk is 256 MB

Re: [j-nsp] Update failed on J-Series

Hi! Perhaps the problem? The disk is 256 MB Regards, Matthias Am 08.03.2009 um 13:11 schrieb Patrik Olsson: You need to make sure you have the new larger flash to go 9.X. Whats your flashdisk size? Cheers Patrik Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hi! Yesterday I tried to upgrade a J-Series from

[j-nsp] Update failed on J-Series

Hi! Yesterday I tried to upgrade a J-Series from 8.5 to 9.3R2. Shortly after the reboot I got a segmentation fault, every time the forwarding daemon started. When I try to start the daemon manualy, the segmentation fault also occur. A rollback was successfully, to the system runs stable

Re: [j-nsp] New flash card in M7i

will be your primary boot medium. Any code upgrades from then on will occur on the CF card, so to back up that code and config in the future, you'd issue 'request system snapshot' to copy them to the HD, which is now your 'alternative' boot medium. David 2009/3/3 Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de

[j-nsp] New flash card in M7i

Hi! I would like to add a new 1 GB CF card in a M7i. I assume, there is none in that device at the moment: Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad1s1a 217M98M 102M 49% / devfs 1.0K 1.0K

Re: [j-nsp] New flash card in M7i

to the HD, which is now your 'alternative' boot medium. David 2009/3/3 Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de: Hi! I would like to add a new 1 GB CF card in a M7i. I assume, there is none in that device at the moment: Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted

Re: [j-nsp] network engineering

hole on the way to the target, when I am tracing from the office... I never had experienced something like that on my home-dsl line or when using only one upstream. Regards, Matthias Am 28.02.2009 um 08:42 schrieb Richard A Steenbergen: On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:21:26AM +0100, Matthias

Re: [j-nsp] network engineering

and are send out on another. Regards, Matthias Am 06.02.2009 um 11:29 schrieb Mark Tinka: On Friday 06 February 2009 05:09:30 pm Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: We have asymmetric routing in several cases. I would like to know, how you would deal against that? The moment you're multi-homed

Re: [j-nsp] network engineering

372.684 ms 372.727 ms 16 213.242.106.86 372.749 ms 372.125 ms 371.732 ms 17 87.238.85.13 340.757 ms 342.057 ms 341.750 ms 18 www.amazon.de (87.238.81.130) [open] 339.757 ms 340.700 ms 341.700 ms Cheers, Ben On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Gelbhardt matth...@commy.de

[j-nsp] network engineering

Hi! I have a little network engineering question and I would like to know the best practice for that. We have asymmetric routing in several cases. I would like to know, how you would deal against that? Is there a simple way to send the packets out of the same interface, they are

[j-nsp] Update on M7

Hi there, we have a M7i with 756 MB Ram here. At the moment the router has Junos 8.5 on it, but we would like to update it to 9.2. But obviously I need to match some requirements. There is the Flash space which has to be 1 GB of space. Unfortunatly I do not have a compact flash space,

[j-nsp] VPDN equivalent on juniper

Hi! We would like to offer DSL lines to our customers and have a provider of these lines on hand. They use a VPDN over a L2TP tunnel for the DSL lines. I was searching which is the equivalent of VPDN on the juniper side, as there examples are all cisco examples. Regards, Matthias

[j-nsp] security features on Junos-ES

Hi! At the moment I am configuring a J6350 for use on the AMS-IX. The router has 9.1 with Enhanced Services installed. I never came across firewall policies before, so I seem to have a bit of a trouble to configure that. I think it is a good idea to have some security to manage the

Re: [j-nsp] DRAM for M7 / crash of M7

um 22:06 schrieb John T. Yocum: Hi Matthias, JuniperClue has a list of modules that people have used, http://juniper.cluepon.net/index.php/Route_Engine_DRAM_Compatibility#RE-5.0_Generic_DRAM --John Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hello! What kind of RAM modules can I use for the M7? Do I have

[j-nsp] DRAM for M7

Hello! What kind of RAM modules can I use for the M7? Do I have to use Juniper RAM or can I use alternate modules? Regards, Matthias ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] bgp-reflextion license

it but there is warning message for it. No one can be sure when it will become a 'hard' license:) Regards, Zeng, Xinyu On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Matthias Gelbhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! Today I configured the cluster statement to enable the route reflection feature of a J6350

[j-nsp] bgp-reflextion license

Hi! Today I configured the cluster statement to enable the route reflection feature of a J6350, as it would solve a problem I have. I would be able to make a full mesh and probably I will do so, but at the moment I am unable to make a direct connection between two sites. So I would like

Re: [j-nsp] router for IX

: On Tuesday 19 August 2008 16:41:24 Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Unfortunatly on the other datasheets of the other routers we do not see any information about the maximum number of peers. Is anyone here who can me give an information? I think the next smaller router would be the M7i. I think

[j-nsp] router for IX

Hello! We would like to connect to an internet connection point (IX). Unfortunatly I have seen in the datasheet of the J-Series, which we use at the moment, that that system can only handle a maximum of 40 bgp peers, which is of course unsufficient, if we will use it to connect to an IX,

Re: [j-nsp] router for IX

d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] De la part de Matthias Gelbhardt Envoyé : mardi 19 août 2008 10:41 À : juniper-nsp Objet : [j-nsp] router for IX Hello! We would like to connect to an internet connection point (IX). Unfortunatly I have seen in the datasheet of the J

Re: [j-nsp] redundant scenario

, you can setup JSRP (Juniper Network Stateful Redudancy Protocol). But I'm not really sure if this is the solution you're looking for. Still a newbie though . Regards, Stevanus Matthias Gelbhardt wrote: Hi! I am hoping you can give me some tips for implementing this scenario. I have two

[j-nsp] redundant scenario

Hi! I am hoping you can give me some tips for implementing this scenario. I have two locations each with two J6350 routers. The locations are connected via a fiber network with each other. On each location the J's do have at least one eBGP session to different carriers. The boxes speak