You could also configure re0 and re1 with different host names by adding -re0
or -re1 to the hostname in the groups re0 and re1 respectively. This will give
a visual confirmation when someone logs into the RE with master-only address.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 24, 2015,
Iif mismatch means the multicast traffic received for this (S,G) has a
different incoming interface than the one we programmed in the PFE (based on
RPF check).
Traffic would get discarded in this case and not forwarded. However, a
notification is sent to RPD/PIM on the RE to check if the we
to see? Shouldn't I see an entry
in the multicast routing table for all entries matched in the flow map
now?
Thanks,
John
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Sure. Make sure you implement this workaround across all Juniper boxes that
are in path
Hi John,
Is it the first packet that gets lost from the stream or the subsequent ones?
If the route does not exist on MX for your (S,G) in the forwarding-table, then
when you receive the packet for this (S,G) on MX, it will be punted to the
routing-enginer (control-plane) for what is known as
Sure. Make sure you implement this workaround across all Juniper boxes that are
in path for this multicast group traffic.
- Nilesh.
From: John Neiberger jneiber...@gmail.commailto:jneiber...@gmail.com
Date: Monday, October 8, 2012 2:40 PM
To: Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.netmailto:nkham
Derek,
What is the PIC being used for? Is it in L2 mode or L3 mode?
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 12/20/10 9:18 AM, Derick Winkworth dwinkwo...@att.net wrote:
Anyone know why this would be happening with an ms-400 service-pic? Its
running at 2-4% CPU and less than one 1% memory utilization...
On M10is acting as RP, do you a route similar to this in the kernel and
cfeb?
R.R.R.R.S.S.S.S.103.a.b.c.d/104 --- pd-x/y/z
To check this in the RE kernel you need to do show route forwarding-table
and in the cfeb show route ip
R.R.R.R is the address configured as RP and S.S.S.S is the address
You mean RP-on-stick scenario?
On 12/15/10 4:55 PM, Philip Palanchi palan...@rutgers.edu wrote:
Sure thing. I'll pull this info tomorrow. The m10i has 9.6R4.4 with ASII PIC.
It's a one-armed router and it's only mission is to be the PIM-SM RP.
Thanks,
Phil
- Original Message -
That's normal. When RE sends ospf packet over GRE, it constructs the full
packet including the GRE header. So it directly put the packet on the physical
interface for transmission. Hence you don't see it in tcpdump output on GRE
interface since outgoing interface is set to the physical
David,
I don't think you can run RSTP in logical routers. As you can see from your
outputs below, RSTP instances in all the LRs are using same system MAC. You
can probably try MSTP but don't think RSTP will work in LRs.
BTW, what JUNOS version is this?
Thanks,
Nilesh.
n...@mx960-lab-re0 ...ge
I would suggest opening a case with JTAC to troubleshoot further. This is
not an expected behavior. Please attach the CLI and messages logs from both
the attempt to configure LRs. Also, provide RSI output.
Thanks,
On 10/27/10 8:34 AM, Vladislav Vasilev vvasi...@vvasilev.net wrote:
I've got
Hi Cristian,
JUNOS does not send label per prefix. It is always one label per vrf.
vrf-table-label enables special handling for the packets destined to the vrf
w/ vrf-table-label enabled in the egress PE on its core facing PFEs (PE-P
link). It avoids the double lookups needed for multi-access
Hi Jim,
In FRF.16, you bundle multiple DLCIs on a single bundle. The bundle is
mapped to multiple physical links. You Juniper configuration reflect the
correct the way of enabling FRF.16. However, I don't think your cisco side
is enabled correctly. On Cisco you have created 2 different bundles
Is there any logical unit created under sp- interface? You seem to have defined
only physical interface without any logical unit to go with under
forwarding-output.
-Original Message-
From: Andy M. [a...@ctdam.com]
Received: 18/08/2010 12:40
To: Nathan Sipes [nathan.si...@gmail.com]
Assuming its martini l2ckt you are talking about, you could establish l2ckt
with lt- interfaces. Peer 2 units of lt- with each other. Put one unit in
inet.0 with IP address configured and use other unit with ethernet ccc or
vlan-ccc encap to establish the l2ckt. You can then ping the remote IP
In that case, as Richard mentioned, you will need a service-pic to create
lt- (logical tunnel) interface.
If you just have one Gig port on J, you could force it in local loopback
mode via CLI. That you bring up the port in up up state and should be able
to bring up the l2ckt as well. Then you can
Jim,
What kind of Service PIC are you using for this purpose. Is it Link Services
PIC or Adaptive Service PIC configured in Layer-2 mode under [edit chassis]?
You need either link services or adaptive service PIC (with L2 mode) to
create the ls- or lsq- interface.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 7/8/10
Do you have show chassis hardware output?
- Nilesh
On 7/8/10 12:37 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Jim,
What kind of Service PIC are you using for this purpose. Is it Link Services
PIC or Adaptive Service PIC configured in Layer-2 mode under [edit chassis
What kind of PIC do you have in FPC slot 1 PIC slot 2?
- Nilesh
On 7/8/10 2:12 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Do you have show chassis hardware output?
Yes, what specifically are you looking for?
- Nilesh
On 7/8/10 12:37 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com
(or PIC
3). It will not work.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 7/8/10 3:33 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
What kind of PIC do you have in FPC slot 1 PIC slot 2?
FPC 0FPC
PIC 0 4x F/E, 100 BASE-TX
PIC 1 1x G/E, 1000 BASE-LX
PIC 2
,
Nilesh.
On 7/8/10 4:43 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Jim,
You need a Physical service PIC in slot 1/2 (or 1/3 as per your below
comment) to do ls- or lsq-. On J-series platform these interfaces are
created by software but on M20, you need a physical service PIC
PIC in your router will only support FRF.15 (One DLCI per
Bundle).
Thanks,
Nilesh
On 7/8/10 4:48 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Sorry...my bad. With Multi-link pic look for ml-2/0/0 interfaces. However, I
am not sure if ml- interfaces supports FRF.16 configuration that you
or AS/AS2 PIC to do FRF.16.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 7/8/10 5:04 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
I think Multilink PIC does not support FRF.16 configuration ( mlfr-uni-nni
bundle or multiple DLCIs in a single bundle). You will need LS PIC or AS/AS2
PIC (with Layer-2 package
On MX, you can create access-ports connected to the hosts using
interface-mode access with a unique vlan id assigned to the port. This is
conceptually similar to switchport mode access on Cisco.
With either interface-mode access you do not need to explicitly assign the
logical unit to the
Hi Richard,
Did you do any config changes on the router (especially MPLS related) that
triggered this messages in RPD?
Do you have autobw configuration enabled for the LSPs?
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 4/24/10 10:58 AM, Richard A Steenbergen r...@e-gerbil.net wrote:
Does anybody know what the EVENT
Do you know if Source is registered with the RP? SPT flag is set on (S,G) on
the RP so it must have but just in case check show pim rps extensive on
both source DR and RP. Does the SPT path from receiver DR to the Source DR
goes via RP or does it take an alternate path?
One more thing to check
--- On Wed, 21/4/10, snort bsd snort...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
From: snort bsd snort...@yahoo.com.au
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] multicast questions
To: juniper-nsp juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net, Nilesh Khambal
nkham...@juniper.net
Received: Wednesday, 21 April, 2010, 7:16 AM
from the PR, it seems
The message shows that the scheduler slips were caused due to a user process
taking up CPU for longer than 4 seconds. This could very well be some
task/job inside RPD or could be some other process. Was there any
configuration change done recently on the router that triggered these
messages? Are
Ramesh,
Just curious. Do you still see the earlier mentioned DA rejects, policed
discards after restarting RPD?
Thanks,
Nilesh
On 4/7/10 4:34 AM, Ramesh Karki rameshka...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
The issue is resolved now after restarting RPD. Thank you all for helping me
to resolve the
Ramesh,
Do you see cisco neighbor in show ipv6 neighbors?
Thanks,
Nilesh
On 4/4/10 11:32 PM, Ramesh Karki rameshka...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Antonio,
yes, interface ge-0/0/0 is only configure for ospf3 and interface fe-0/1/0
is configued for dual-stack.
Here, I have listed the required
PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Ramesh,
Do you see cisco neighbor in show ipv6 neighbors?
Thanks,
Nilesh
On 4/4/10 11:32 PM, Ramesh Karki rameshka...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Antonio,
yes, interface ge-0/0/0 is only configure for ospf3 and interface fe-0/1/0
is configued for dual
can you show us your ospf and ospf3 configuration? Also, have you specified
router-id under routing-options?
Thanks,
Nilesh
-Original Message-
From: Ramesh Karki rameshka...@gmail.com
Subj: Re: [j-nsp] ipv6 routing
Date: Sat Apr 3, 2010 10:52 pm
Size: 1K
To:
.
On 4/4/10 12:21 AM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
can you show us your ospf and ospf3 configuration? Also, have you specified
router-id under routing-options?
Thanks,
Nilesh
-Original Message-
From: Ramesh Karki rameshka...@gmail.com
Subj: Re: [j-nsp] ipv6
Do the core facing interfaces on R4 and R6 have family mpls enabled. Doesn't
look like it is enabled, from the attached config snippet. Also, make sure both
core facing interfaces on R5, towards R4 and R6 have family mpls turned on.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
- Original Message -
From:
Why is the below route on R6, isn’t pointing to any LSP towards R4? Is route
reflector changing the protocol next-hop of the route coming from R4?
...
10.0.3.4:1:1:1/96Receiving the R4 loopback..
*[BGP/170] 00:07:30, localpref 100, from 10.0.3.5
Have you configured NTP server on the router? If not, can you pls configured
it and check? You may need to bounce the AS PIC after configuring it.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
-Original Message-
From: Scott Berkman
Sent: Thu 12/31/2009 10:33 AM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [j-nsp] PIC
Can you add a default route in virtual-router PBR to point to next-table as
inet.0?
- set virtual-router PBR routing-options static route 0.0.0.0/0 next-table
inet.0
You will loose the granularity of defining the source address and port to
forward the traffic but I am not sure if that matters
On 12/2/09 7:10 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
- set virtual-router PBR routing-options static route 0.0.0.0/0 next-table
inet.0
Sorry the syntax should be
- set routing-instances PBR routing-options static route 0.0.0.0/0
next-table inet.0
Thanks,
Nilesh
, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
On 12/2/09 7:10 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
- set virtual-router PBR routing-options static route 0.0.0.0/0
http://0.0.0.0/0 next-table
inet.0
Sorry the syntax should be
- set routing-instances PBR routing
: Active NoReadvrt Int
Age: 3:52:20
Task: IF
AS path: I
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
So, are you saying that by adding a default route pointing to the inet.0 table
(default routing table) the return
5/0/0
inet6.0 2/0/0
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
What is the destination for the forward traffic? Is it one of the connected
IPs on ge-0/1/0? I suspect if the problem is with forward
, at 8:27 PM, Chris Evans
chrisccnpsp...@gmail.commailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com wrote:
Just tried and that appears to work..
Explain as to what an interface-route is?
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Nilesh Khambal
mailto:nkham...@juniper.netnkham...@juniper.netmailto:nkham...@juniper.net
wrote
Hi Richard,
Just talking from this router perspective, it looks like the remote end
router has problem receiving BFD packets from this router. It signaled the
BFD session down because of that.
You can start by looking at egress stats at the on the local router. See if
there are any ttp queue
/PFE. Also, check the CPU and memory utilization of FPCs on either
sides using show chassis fpc command.
Thanks
Nilesh.
On 11/21/09 12:53 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Hi Richard,
Just talking from this router perspective, it looks like the remote end
router has problem
Hi Shekar,
Is there any specific reason, you downgrading from 9.4 to 7.2? Which type of
interfaces are not coming up? Most likely they are not supported in 7.2. You
need to check Supported PIC page in the external documentation to find the
release the particular PIC is supported from
For example
Hi Aaron,
What is the JUNOS version on this router?
RDP is a Reliable Delivery Protocol. Its an internal TCP-like protocol used
between RE and PFE (CFEB board in this case) to communicate with each and
exchange information such as route, stats, interface status etc. This
communication happens
Hi Matthias,
What JUNOS version are you running on this router? Is other end 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
Hi Alex,
Sometimes, these messages also suggest a transient spike in the sheaf memory
utilization on the FPC for one of sheaves. It may not be necessarily a memory
leak. Sheaf memory is used for sending and receiving the control and data
packets between RE and the PFE.
Seeing the SHEAF and NH
Check the MX solution guide in documentation for latest JUNOS release.
You need to look for interface-mode trunk, bridge-domain
configuration and IRB interface configuration
Thanks,
Nilesh
--
Sent from my mobile handheld device
On Aug 21,
http://10.0.0.3/29
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
bridge-domains {
vlan10 {
vlan-id 10;
routing-interface irb.10;
}
}
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Check the MX solution guide in documentation for latest JUNOS release.
You need to look for interface-mode trunk, bridge
Dan,
This EX switch configuration. Original post requested configuration for MX
Switches.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On 8/21/09 11:45 AM, Dan Farrell da...@appliedi.net wrote:
This is how I do it... if this is not a recommended method, please let me know
(PLEASE!) I currently configure around 90 L3
Hi Brian,
Your way of configuring trunks and access ports is what I call an old style of
configuration before the introduction of interface-mode trunk and
interface-mode access knobs in JUNOS. Old style was a bit painful to use when
you had to configure multiple vlans on trunk interface. With
Hi Dave,
You still need a bridge-domain with matching vlan-id configured. What
interface-mode does is when you add a vlan under a interface with
interface-mode access or in vlan-id-list under interface-mode trunk, it
will automatically associate that interface with the bridge-domain that you
It looks like CFEB dumped core and restarted. Please open a JTAC case
and let me them figure out what went wrong with CFEB. Please gather all
logs around the time of the problem. Usually following logs should be a
good start.
- show log messages[.(0-9).gz] (From RE)
- show syslog messages
With ip6-tunneling command (assuming you have that configured), JUNOS
will convert the v4 LSP route in inet.3 to a 6to4 v6 format in inet6.3.
This route is just used to resolve the vpn-v6 prefixes received from
remote PE and not for actual traffic forwarding. Traffic forwarding
should still
I think it is becuase no adjacencies are formed on the loopback
interface.
Thanks,
Nilesh
--
Sent from my mobile handheld device
On Aug 3, 2009, at 11:36 PM, Fahad Khan fahad.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear All,
Why in Junos, a Loopback Network
Hi,
You should really do
show route forwarding-table destination 69.165.166.240/28 detail|extensive
show route only shows the RPD's (routing process) view of the route.
Load balancing policy is applied when the routes are installed in the
kernel forwarding-table (same as PFE
Hi,
Next time it crashes, Please type panic at db prompt a couple of
times. This will cause M7i to generate a kernel coredump and then reset
automatically.
Please open a case with JTAC and provide them with this corefile. They
will be able to figure out the root cause for this problem
If the traffic is identified as MPLS traffic at ingress i.e. It is a
tagged packet at ingress, exp classification will be applied to it.
Other non-tagged traffic will be classified according to the protocol
and applied classifiers. If it is an IPv4 and you have DSCP classifier
applied at
Do you have a lot of lsa retransmissions on E1? Check for drops in Q3
or Q0 on E1. Try disabling any CoS config you might have on this E1
link.
Thanks,
Nilesh
--
Sent from my mobile handheld device
On May 18, 2009, at 9:32 PM, Asad Ul-Islam
Is this an ingress PE?
Nilesh
Andrew Jimmy wrote:
I know one can displays the route for the LDP FECs, stored in inet.3 using
'show route ldp table inet.3'. What if you want to see the label-switching
state stored in mpls.0
For this you use 'show route table mpls.0'; now I don't know why this
Hi Stephen,
I am not a J-Series expert but you might want to check into licensing
issues. I understand that you need J-Flow license to run cflowd after
JUNOS 8.5.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
Stephen Fulton wrote:
Excellent point:
s...@router show services accounting flow
error: Sampling does not have
You can do it with event policy. But it might depend on junos version.
Nilesh
On Apr 16, 2009, at 8:29 PM, wang yi
wang.yi.2...@googlemail.commailto:wang.yi.2...@googlemail.com wrote:
Just wondering if it is possible to add custom log messages to the log file
so that I can have something
Can you try policy based routing using input firewall filter on EX? This
was you can redirect the traffic to another forwarding-instance where
your proxy resides. You will also have to take care of reverse routing
from the proxy forwarding instance back to inet.0 on EX so that return
traffic
20, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Can you try policy based routing using input firewall filter on EX?
This was you can redirect the traffic to another forwarding-instance
where your proxy resides. You will also have to take care of reverse
routing from the proxy forwarding instance
Cisco includes ip and icmp header size in the total specified packet
size. Payload in the case is 1510-20-8 = 1482 bytes. Juniper adds icmp
and ip header to the payload size you specify. So 1510 becomes 1538
bytes of ip packet.
Thanks,
Nilesh
On Mar 16, 2009, at 11:22 AM, Flavio
I think its misconfig.
You can configured unit 100 under fe-5/2/2 but in L2CKT you have
configured unit 600.
Thanks,
Nilesh
Dinesh wrote:
just attaching the interface config..
fe-5/2/2 {
vlan-tagging;
encapsulation vlan-ccc;
fastether-options {
loopback;
Richard,
You can try debug icmp error from pfe. However, depending on load
this might fill up the syslog buffer really fast. Messages are also
throttled at 10 pps. You can disable the message generation using
undebug icmp error. Before enabling debug run command show icmp
statistics from
2Mbps traffic.
Thanks,
Faizal
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Nilesh Khambal
nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Can you do show interface queue ls-1/2/0.3?
Enqueued traffic for the bundle can be more than the actual
transmitted traffic. Transmitted traffic should rate-limited at 8xE1
bandwidth
Can you do show interface queue ls-1/2/0.3?
Enqueued traffic for the bundle can be more than the actual
transmitted traffic. Transmitted traffic should rate-limited at 8xE1
bandwidth.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
On Feb 21, 2009, at 7:21 AM, Faizal Rachman faizal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Actually it
Are you querying like communityn...@instance-name. In your case it
will be testcommun...@rdi. If not can you try that.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
Derick Winkworth wrote:
#
Feb 20 17:44:54 snmpd[4d88b0c2]
Feb 20 17:44:54 snmpd[4d88b0c2] Get-Next-Request
Feb 20 17:44:54 snmpd[4d88b0c2]
Ahmad Shah wrote:
This is what it should be like r...@testcommunity
HTH
Regards,
Masood
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nilesh Khambal
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 12:53 AM
To: Derick Winkworth
Cc
Arafat asad.ara...@gmail.com wrote:
hehehe :D
Thanks Nilesh
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
I see that you have a JTAC case opened. So I will shut up now :) and let
JTAC drive it forward.
Just as a note, load balancing in JUNOS, largely depends on what
18148938608 3128752
Output: 991881708 18436 692044946187105618936
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Nilesh Khambal nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
try, these things in the same order one at time and see if one of them makes
any difference.
1. Remove equal-weighted-mode
Can you please send the output of below 2 commands for the destination
that you want to load balance?
show route a.b.c.d extensive
show route forwarding-table destination a.b.c.d extensive
What kind of hashing have you configured under edit forwarding-options?
Thanks,
Nilesh.
As ad Arafat
achieve load sharing in as1
Best Regards
As'ad
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Nilesh Khambal
nkham...@juniper.net wrote:
Is it the traffic coming in from pacnet vrf that you are trying
to load
balance when going over as1 towards MPLS cloud? If so, I think you
should
configure family
It won't be used to forward any transit traffic since it pointing to
fxp0. Fxp0 can not be used to forward any transit traffic.
The route will still be used for routing the return traffic on fxp0
network. This is mainly the traffic directed to fxp0 interface itself.
If you don't want
Hi Samit,
Do you have the output of show pfe statistics traffic from this
router?
What was the type of DoS attack traffic? Was it directed to any of
the interfaces on the router? Did you have any filter applied to
loopback interface to drop such traffic? If yes, did any of the
filters
:0
Packet Forwarding Engine Input IPv4 Header Checksum Error and Output
MTU
Error statistics:
Input Checksum : 196
Output MTU :0
I don't have JTAC support access.. :)
Regards,
Samit
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Hi Samit
Please disable cdp and keepalives on Cisco port connected to this M7i.
Also, disable spanning tree on this port by configuring it as an access
port.
Thanks,
Nilesh.
Samit wrote:
Hi, I just installed my first juniper M7i in the production couple of
hour back and after resolving few routing
it. But I don't think i really
need
to worry much, do I? because I don't see any packet loss.
Regards,
Samit
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Please disable cdp and keepalives on Cisco port connected to this
M7i.
Also, disable spanning tree on this port by configuring it as an
access
port.
Thanks
see it. But I don't think i
really need
to worry much, do I? because I don't see any packet loss.
Regards,
Samit
Nilesh Khambal wrote:
Please disable cdp and keepalives on Cisco port connected to this
M7i.
Also, disable spanning tree on this port by configuring it as an
access
port
Hi Matt,
Where did you apply the filter? sp- inside or sp-outside interface? What
direction did you apply the filter?
For sp- interfaces always interpret the filter directions from PFE point of
view and ³not² from service-pic point of view.
So what is ³input² for service-pic on any interface
Could you please share the filter configuration and how you applied it on
the inside interface?
You can filter traffic going over the IPSec tunnel i.e. From
clear--encrypted direction by applying an output firewall filter to sp-
inside interface. To filter the traffic after it is decrypted from
Hi Derick,
I doubt that its a memory leak unless some new feature that could cause
memory leak (due to a bug) or new configuration was added recently that
could suddenly increase the number of routes on the router. It also can not
be a memory leak if the router was running for 2.5 yrs without any
From edit mode,
l...@sizzle-re0# show groups junos-defaults applications ?
Possible completions:
[Enter]Execute this command
application Define an application
application-set Define an application set
+ apply-groups Groups from which to inherit configuration
An indirect nexthop is the one that resolves over another nexthop.
You see this with multihop BGP session where a route's protocol nexthop
resolves over another route (either via static or learnt via IGP).
Thanks,
Nilesh
--
Sent from my mobile
87 matches
Mail list logo
