Re: [j-nsp] Strange Behavior

Adnan, What version? Have a look at PR/229851 Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Adnan Mohsin Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 3:31 PM To:

Re: [j-nsp] IPSec config

A lot is available online, pls help yourself. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos90/feature-guide/con figuring-ipsec.html Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] LDP/MPLS is mandatory in the route-reflector bgp vpnv4uplink?

Ricardo, I think that's expected simply because VPN-IPv4 Routes resolve in inet.3 (being MPLS based) To support L3 VPNs, the Juniper Networks PE router uses several routing tables. Inet.0 : The first routing table, inet.0 contains routes learned by the provider's IGP and by BGP. These routes

Re: [j-nsp] Load Balancing in BGP...

Has been discussed before : http://www.mail-archive.com/juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net/msg06616.html The answer is Yes, you need to enable it. Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net]

Re: [j-nsp] BGP strange problem on M10i

A. Nalkhande From: Ramesh Karki [mailto:rameshka...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 5:34 PM To: Nalkhande Tarique Abbas Cc: Chris Adams; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] BGP strange problem on M10i Hi, Thank for the response

Re: [j-nsp] PBR config help

Samit, Have a look here, rib-groups is what you may need. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos82/swconfig82-policy /html/firewall-config36.html Hope it helps! Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] PR Site URL

Check the below hierarchy: Juniper.netsupportJunos Defect Search PR/396291 : https://www2.juniper.net/prsearch/viewmultiplepr.jsp?searchType=sPRNotx tPrnumber=396291sPRNoSearch=Search Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From:

Re: [j-nsp] BGP strange problem on M10i

If you have NSR configured, then have a look at PR/396291 Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ramesh Karki Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 10:06 PM To: Chris

Re: [j-nsp] BGP policy-options policy-statement

you said I have an issue, I reject my private prefix-list but my BGP policy keep sending my private prefix-list. Tarique set policy-options policy-statement OutBound-BGP-Routes-to- term No-Advertise from route-filter 10.0.0.0/8 orlonger reject - you said **I chance the

Re: [j-nsp] BGP policy-options policy-statement

Hi Onam, The default BGP export policy is to readvertise all learned BGP routes to all BGP speakers. Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Onam Rubio Sent:

Re: [j-nsp] is it an attack or not?

Greetings Walaa, These messages are normal. The user is authenticated and it is not an indication of a breach of the router's security. Basically, JWeb logins appear as a JUNOScript client '(unauthenticated user)'. The JWeb client uses JUNOScript to log the username/password that was entered at

Re: [j-nsp] group interface

Try fine tuning Configuration groups to accomplish similar task in Junos. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos93/swconfig-cli/swco nfig-cli.pdf Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] Layer 3 VPN Routing and Forwarding (VRF) Tables Issue

You said --I have confirmed that in router A, all the routes that are learned via direct peering (CT vrf) are inside premium vrf route table. --I can confirm that direct connected, static, and customer's BGP routes that are provisioned in router A under premium vrf are being seen under router

Re: [j-nsp] Layer 3 VPN Routing and Forwarding (VRF) Tables Issue

? Is this BGP peer not under any VRF at a global level? Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: Jimmy Halim [mailto:ji...@pacnet.net] Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 2:52 PM To: Nalkhande Tarique Abbas; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Layer 3 VPN Routing

Re: [j-nsp] RPM for performance monitoring?

I think the key differentiator here would be the RPM timestamps for which you have two versions viz RE based timestamps or Hardware timestamps. The RE based version keeps timestamps in memory when packets are sent and received. This is not very accurate due to the delay added by PFE to RE

Re: [j-nsp] Netflow sampling broken in 9.6R1.13 ?

Alfred, Reply inline... You Asked Now Junos 9.6 note ## Warning: 'output' is deprecated Tarique output was moved under family in 9.6 hence the warning. You Asked If I activate the new syntax forwarding-options sampling family inet I get always an error: Tarique Config will commit if

Re: [j-nsp] BCP for RE protection

I think you are probably looking for BCP of the following aspects: - Loopback filter for RE protection against surplus ICMP/ssh/ftp etc.. - Minimizing excessive logging/sampling on hard disk. - Utilizing chassis redundancy options {like GRES, failover etc} Am I correct in my understanding?

Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP Case Study - 1 Pg 42 - archive size and files

The default maximum file size depends on the platform type: * 128 kilobytes (KB) for J-series Routers * 1 (MB) for M-series, MX-series, and T-series routing platforms * 10 MB for TX Matrix platforms So based on the setup/platform this value should be defined or probably left to default.

Re: [j-nsp] Ethernet CCCC Outer Vlan removal

Pls have a look here, http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos90/swconfig-network- interfaces/stacking-and-rewriting-gigabit-ethernet-iq-vlan-tags.html#id- 12141009 Hope it helps! Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From:

Re: [j-nsp] Partition/Format new HD

Brendan, Your new hdd doesn't look to be in good shape, how about a quick health check? A smartd, r...@radium-re0-tarique% smartd -oX /dev/ad1 Drive Command Successful, Extended Self test has begun Please wait 17 minutes for test to complete Use smartd -oA to abort test Ensure alternate super

Re: [j-nsp] Broken Per-Flow load sharing

Beginning with JUNOS Release 9.3, you can enable router-specific load balancing by configuring a unique, load balance hash value for each Packet Forwarding Engine slot. To configure per-prefix load balancing. include the load-balance statement at the [edit forwarding-options] hierarchy level:

Re: [j-nsp] M7i compact flash card

Basically, the CF cards for each of the packages have been exclusively qualified for each type of RE hence the presence of different upgrade kits. For instance, If you look at the upgrade kits, you can use the kit CF-UPG2-1G-S for RE-400 and RE-850, which is for M7i and M10i. The CF card

Re: [j-nsp] M120 Boot Up Error

Abhijeet, The error you observed is simply due to the fact that CF (ad0) is your primary boot device your router has root (/) mounted on hard disk (ad2) r...@lab-re1% sysctl -a | grep bootdevs machdep.bootdevs: usb,compact-flash,disk,lan You need to verify couple of things before rectifying

Re: [j-nsp] tacplus on EX3200

, but this is a start. Thank you to everyone who offered assistance on this issue. -b -Original Message- From: Nalkhande Tarique Abbas [mailto:ntari...@juniper.net] Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 10:01 AM To: Bill Blackford; Walaa Abdel razzak Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [j

Re: [j-nsp] tacplus on EX3200

Do you have a remote user configured? Pls try to add this .. system { login { user remote { full-name All remote users; uid 2001; class super-user; } } } Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From:

Re: [j-nsp] Command to modify ADSPEC object default on PATH messages.

AFAIK, JUNOS uses the Adspec field for maximum transmission unit (MTU) negotiation. So when an LSP is created across a set of links with different MTU sizes, the ingress router does not know what the smallest MTU is on the LSP path. By default, the maximum packet size for the LSP is based on the

Re: [j-nsp] router protect policy

Bill, Can you try removing the except knob. source-prefix-list { NMS-NETWORKS except; -- source-prefix-list { BGP-NEIGHBORS except; -- Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] Stub Router in OSPF

The following is from RFC 2328, page 15. Interfaces to point-to-point networks need not be assigned IP addresses. When interface addresses are assigned, they are modelled as stub links, with each router advertising a stub connection to the other router's interface address. Optionally, an IP

Re: [j-nsp] Zero counters for destination-class

What platform Junos? AFAIK, DCU filters wont work on output on T-series, M120, M320 routing platforms b'cos the source class and destination classes are not carried across the platform fabric. Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From:

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

Hey Mathhias, Any filter on the interface? Config of interface pls? As Truman also pointed out, Can you pls share, show log messages | match NOTIFICATION This would help to identify the BGP Notification code/subcode. Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From:

Re: [j-nsp] J6350 auto reboot.

Hi Asif, Misc hardware failure..That shouldn't be anything to worry! Apart from that what Junos version? Anything that you feel triggers it? Can you share more details like the complete console output during the reboot. Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message-

Re: [j-nsp] vlan-id 0

Hi AFAIK, basically a unit 32767 is created implicitly when vlan-tagging is enabled to pass untagged control traffic (like STP, LACP ... etc). When a unit with vlan-id 0 is configured, this unit itself is used to send the control traffic. So the unit 32767 then gets deleted. ge-1/1/0

Re: [j-nsp] vlan-id 0

-Original Message- From: mas...@nexlinx.net.pk [mailto:mas...@nexlinx.net.pk] Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 9:46 PM To: Nalkhande Tarique Abbas Cc: Bit Gossip; Juniper List Subject: Re: [j-nsp] vlan-id 0 Your configuration is missing vlan-tagging Is behaviour remains the same if you add vlan

Re: [j-nsp] Sanitising m/t series routers?

Hi Andrew, [edit] load factory-default commit or load override /packages/mnt/jbase/sbin/install/default-juniper.conf. This will restore back the factory-default juniper configuration and will flush out the rest. Hope it helps. [P.S: you may be required to add back root-authentication for

Re: [j-nsp] UK adsl config

Hey Nick, AFAIK, the access-profile configuration should work if the client name matches the service provider BRAS hostname. Try to use passive knob under ppp-options chap also add local-name under it. unit 0 { description ADSL Backup; encapsulation atm-ppp-vc-mux; vci 38;

Re: [j-nsp] Maximum no. of static arp entries in M7i

Samit Something similar to limit source-mac should help...you can try to fine tune it further! l...@m120# show interfaces ge-1/3/0 encapsulation flexible-ethernet-services; gigether-options { === source-filtering; } } vlan-id 1001; encapsulation vlan-vpls

Re: [j-nsp] as-path filtering

Pls make appropriate changes as below it should work ! lab# show | compare [edit policy-options] + policy-statement test { + from as-path [ test test1 ]; + then reject; + } [edit policy-options] + as-path test _1234$; + as-path test1 _5678$; Thanks Regards, Tarique A.

Re: [j-nsp] as-path filtering

Try this.. set policy-options as-path a .*1234 set policy-options as-path b .*5678 Thanks Regards, Tarique A. Nalkhande -Original Message- From: Samit [mailto:janasa...@wlink.com.np] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 10:47 AM To: Nalkhande Tarique Abbas Cc: juniper-nsp Subject: Re: [j

Re: [j-nsp] Interpreting output of show route route protocol bgpdetail

Junaid, It's the Preference2 value. JUNOS stores the 1's complement of the LocalPref value in the Preference2 field. For example, if the LocalPref value for Route 1 is 100, the Preference2 value is -101. If the LocalPref value for Route 2 is 155, the Preference2 value is -156. Route 2 is

Re: [j-nsp] PPP Negotiation Issues

Hey Jason, I don't see any LCP Conf-Ack for the LCP request sent by Adtran, as you pointed the endpoint discriminator option block received from the peer are truncated with a LCP config-reject message. So what Junos version router is loaded with? Check if you are hitting PR/97169 (available on

Re: [j-nsp] hidden route

Try Removing as-overide from R2. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tomasz Opala Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 3:30 PM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] hidden route Hi gurus, Imagine following topology: