to this is that it involves some routing changes on the VPN portion
>> which we're trying to avoid as it involves a third party.
>>
>> Literally on the Cisco 2800 in place it's "ip route 172.30.200.0
>> 255.255.255.0 192.168.20.121". On the SRX we have
55.255.0 192.168.20.121". On the SRX we have "set routing-options
> static route 172.30.200.0/24 next-hop 192.168.20.121".
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Damkot [mailto:mdamkot...@gmail.com]
> Sent
Paul-
Just to make sure I'm tracking correctly, you've tried installing a static
route and it didn't work?
On Nov 3, 2010, at 11:48 , Paul Stewart wrote:
> Hi there.
>
>
>
> Can anyone give any suggestion/guidance on the following.
>
>
>
> I'm trying to do a static route *out* the same
Junos is Junos, the command structure hasn't really changed significantly since
4.0
If you're protocol savvy, just novice to how a particular vendor twists knobs,
check the e-learning stuff on Juniper site first:
http://www.juniper.net:80/us/en/training/technical_education/
On Sep 21, 201
Have you tried anything to date?
On Sep 20, 2010, at 08:49 , Bikash Bhattarai wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I need a solution on SRX 210 to create a route based vpn with cisco 1841
> with multiple proxy-ids.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bikash Bhattarai
>
> Technical Manager
>
> Dristi Tech Pvt.
an u further elaborate "certain flow types"
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> Muhammad Fahad Khan
> JNCIP - M/T # 834
> IT Specialist
> Global Technology Services, IBM
> fa...@pk.ibm.com
> +92-301-8247638
> Skype: fahad-ibm
> http://pk.linkedin.com/in/muhammad
Don't.
Breaks a bunch of A/A functionality as well as certain flow types. (at
least on the 5000s)
I have tickets pending with Juniper.
On Sep 15, 2010, at 05:35 , Fahad Khan wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Can somebody please provide feedback of Junos 10.1R3.7 on SRX3600 (running
> in chassis cluste
Upgrade to 10.2 has
> eliminated the problem.
>
> Matthias
>
> Am 07.09.10 01:49, schrieb Michael Damkot:
>> This sounds like a bug, have you contacted the J-TAC
>>
>>
>> On Sep 4, 2010, at 08:44 , Matthias Brumm wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
This sounds like a bug, have you contacted the J-TAC
On Sep 4, 2010, at 08:44 , Matthias Brumm wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Sorry to write again.. I may have found a clue:
>
> After commiting this happans:
>
> PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATETIME WCPU COMMAND
> 1058 root1 132
I run A/A SRX 5000 series now, and I would advise against it.
They aren't really designed for that, and the hello messages that would be
required between chassis didn't play so well over MPLS when I tried it.
On Aug 31, 2010, at 13:08 , Stefan Fouant wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> F
You can push them off to a syslog server and use basic unix tools, kind of
depends on if you want any correlation or graphical info return. I've also
used an A10 solution called a sentrie with mixed results...
On Aug 23, 2010, at 16:19 , Johan Borch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does any one have an opin
Paul-
I was having some similar events as far as your TCP session issues...
I found a work around by using:
set security flow tcp-session rst-invalidate-session.
Not sure if it's the perfect solution, but it did seem to solve our similar
issue.
On Aug 5, 2010, at 09:59 , Paul Stewart wrote:
I have two 5XXX series SRX boxes in an Active / Active cluster sitting in the
middle of a network. They currently carry the following: (PIM goes up and down
depending on downstream pulls)
inet.0: 322738 destinations, 968448 routes (322735 active, 2 holddown, 20
hidden)
Restart Complete
You have to be cautious with the 'that command works' in SRX
There are a number of things that you can turn 'on' in the SRX, and the UI
gives you the feedback that it's working, but it actually doesn't turn on the
functionality, because it's not supported etc
On Jul 24, 2010, at 18:15
14 matches
Mail list logo
