Re: [j-nsp] What exactly causes inconsistent RTT seen using ping utility in Junos?

E. It mention that theses packets transit by gigabit ethernet interfaces in the TPP proprietary protocol, but nothing after. What daemon is in charge of handling TPP flow on the RE side ? rpd ? for icmp is at the end the packet go through the freebsd kernel (seems logic but). And what cause

Re: [j-nsp] What exactly causes inconsistent RTT seen using ping utility in Junos?

busy doing programming RPD asked it to do, instead of giving ICMP towards RE. This is interesting discussion. It was always unclear to me what are handled by the freebsd kernel, rpd, or the micro junos kernel. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5110 : Q-in-Q in VXLAN

CCC should work (of memory it worked for me on a simple setup with only one P in the middle). -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5110 : Q-in-Q in VXLAN

supported in the MPLS edge switch if label swap is done. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 v MX104

real router, a good density and the Junos toolbox on 1U. Sound good on the paper. What are the port details ? 8x10G ports and 4x100/40/10G which can be spitted ? Best, PS : can you give me some price detail in pv ? PS2 : How about your remote ? :) -- Raphael Maz

Re: [j-nsp] improving global unicast convergence (with or without BGP-PIC)

Is this the case for chassis MX104 and 80? Is your recommendation to run with indirect-next-hop on them as well? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think this is the default on all the MX since a long time. There as no downside afaik. -- Raphael Maz

Re: [j-nsp] MC-LAG reliability

). -- Raphael Mazelier On 22/12/2016 15:15, Vincent Bernat wrote: Hey! How reliable should MC-LAG be considered on EX and QFX series (in a pure L2 setup)? I had a few bad experiences with virtual chassis where a hiccup usually translates to both switches becoming unavailable. This is pretty rare of course

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper PTX1000

... -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Soft removal of traffic from AE?

ob, and on UDP based application there re-transmission or control mechanism. But if you cannot control the server side (this look strange by the way) you can just go on, after all lacp goal is also to provide redundancy. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ j

Re: [j-nsp] Very basic question about MPLS and RSVP's place in the design

On 27/10/2016 20:28, Karsten Thomann wrote: I'm a bit curious why until now no one mentioned MPLS Enabled Applications... Good one but much more theoretical. I like to have practical examples for my understanding of a new subject. -- Raphael Maz

Re: [j-nsp] Very basic question about MPLS and RSVP's place in the design

I would personally recommend "Mpls in the SDN Era" from Oreily. The first chapter are a really good practical introduction to MPLS and further chapters treat RVSP in detail. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list j

Re: [j-nsp] QFX10002 as P Router

evant. Yep that the plan, with separate RR (vrr or other). Very likely QFX5k will cover large percentage of P deployment use-cases. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/ju

Re: [j-nsp] QFX10002 as P Router

ower price, what do you think of using a qfx5100 as P/LSR router ? The mpls support look correct, and it have a lot of 10G ports. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Core network design for an ISP

#x27;ve grab many of the filter over the years, and can publish it if someone are interrested). -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Core network design for an ISP

ked in the "dmz" vrf, so how do you avoid this kind of leaking ? For the default leak, what about a static default backup route ? -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Core network design for an ISP

ing, but I have make the opposite, aka mixed edge and core link on MPC. The idea was to provide redundancy in case of one MPC failure. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Core network design for an ISP

at I'm going to have large VPN tables and 1.5M won't be enough. What the point to separate upstream and downstream port on different MPC ? (apart FIB size) -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https:

Re: [j-nsp] Core network design for an ISP

n the main table/main vr (vrf provide more flexibility for a little increased complexity) - LDP for signaling MPLS (unless you really need FRR, and/or QOS) as always KISS is a good approach :) -- Raphael Mazelier Le 25/03/2016 00:57, Matthew Crocker a écrit : Hello, What is the current bes

Re: [j-nsp] Routing Engine filtering on EX with VRF

ge-1/0/13.0; interface lo0.1; route-distinguisher 10:14; vrf-target target:10:10; vrf-table-label; } The filter is never reached... I will open a case on the Jtac. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.ne

Re: [j-nsp] Leaking from a vrf to inet0

Le 21/03/2016 18:12, Raphael Mazelier a écrit : Wow look nice. I will give it try. Can I specify a policy in the rib-groups ? So tested and nope. I will stuck with my strange (but working config) configuration. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper

Re: [j-nsp] Leaking from a vrf to inet0

-WANT; } } } Nope, this didn't work in this case (mp-bgp learned route to inet.0). -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Leaking from a vrf to inet0

sing single policy in rib-group declaration. Wow look nice. I will give it try. Can I specify a policy in the rib-groups ? -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Leaking from a vrf to inet0

unicast { rib-group internet-to-inet0; } } neighbor x.x.x.x; } } } without the neighbor knob activated, the pfx are not leaked. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list j

[j-nsp] Leaking from a vrf to inet0

imary table) This last solution seems to be the less manual (I don't want to make config for each pfx) but seems tricky/ugly. I got a working setup with these but definitively looks weird. What are your opinions/hints ? -- Raphael Mazelier ___ j

Re: [j-nsp] VMX to VMX traffic on ESXi

roper license installed ;) (I've spend one hour to find why one of my test vmx does not anymore, before I found that the license have expired...) -- Raphael Mazelier Le 18/03/2016 21:49, serge vautour a écrit : Hello, I haven't had any replies in the Juniper VMX forum so I thought I

Re: [j-nsp] Routing Engine filtering on EX with VRF

. But for some reason the filter does not apply on traffic coming from interface placed in a vrf to the RE. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] Routing Engine filtering on EX with VRF

inet stanza of the interface. Nothing work (nothing is filtering, which is very bad). I wonder if someone has already hit this bug/fonctionnality ? Best, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nethe

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

Le 20/02/2016 16:16, Raphael Mazelier a écrit : Le 19/02/2016 14:08, Adam Vitkovsky a écrit : Thanks for the clarification. And again the Oreilly book "Mpls in the SDN ERA" have three great chapters on the end speficic to theses problematics ("fast restoration").

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

another for Transits. But I'm not aware of any performance issues, certainly the convergence is faster with BGP-PIC. I will try to move/split the DMZ in separate vrf. Seems to be a fun project, specialy the migration part. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ j

Re: [j-nsp] Enable EVPN on existing mpls l3vpn network

af to the other rr neighbor session... No outage on pe. Love it Ah ! good approach. Will make it. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

is only available on l3vpn, so my question is : Is it advisable to run the dmz/internet table in a vrf/routing instance on juniper ? and what are the pros/cons of doing that ? pros : PIC, more flexibily ? cons : more complex setup, performance issue (I've heard some storie about that) ? B

Re: [j-nsp] About the family ccc config stanza

e sub interface .0 remain ENET2, not Ethernet-CCC. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] About the family ccc config stanza

ot;familly " stanza it just not working :) -- Raphael Mazelier Le 10/02/2016 18:12, Pyxis LX a écrit : Hi, All. I'm not quite sure when to use the "family ccc" config stanza. I know that this stanza should be used when applying a filter or a policer, but what if I don

Re: [j-nsp] Slow performance of the KRT queue

ificant re engenering of the junos core. Or equip all its routers with fast x86 cpu :p -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Slow performance of the KRT queue

uld trigger massive change of route and do : - quick clear on the entire fib, - quick install of some specific route (which was flaged). - normal update Or other, but provide some options to the operators. Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier Le 05/02/2016 17:15, Brad Fleming a écrit : Welcome to run

Re: [j-nsp] understanding interface encapsulation, family ... and more

era" is also interresting, regarding specificly vpn and other overlay scnenario. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX2200 virtual-chassis

:) -- Raphael Mazelier Le 03/02/2016 14:34, Matthew Crocker a écrit : Hello, I have an EX-2200 in production and would like to add another to create a virtual-chassis. The current production unit will be the master and the new unit will be the backup.Does creating a virtual-chassis

Re: [j-nsp] RTBH

d by Johan originally. Ah ok I was mis understanding and agree with you. My IGP contains only my loopback, but I could understand how a laxist policy can inject /32 in it. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether

Re: [j-nsp] RTBH

ters ? And as generaly we configure IBGP session with next hop self, rtbh route are directed to the origin router. That's why the Niall setup is required, make an execption (do not nhs rtbh route) and set a next hop that is localy resolved, to discard. -- R

Re: [j-nsp] SRX cluster across L2 vlan issue

work tagged). - jumbo frame (at least 9000), because fabric link use special frame (and long one). If the mtu remains at 1500, strange thing may happen. - no stp/whatever on the ports Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier. Le 13/01/16 17:04, james list a écrit : Hi experts, a customer of mine has

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5200 and other software than JunOS

your account rep to see exactly what the details are. The QFX5200 isn't shipping just yet, i believe it the 32 port one will be Q1 2016 and the 64 port will be Q2 We use lots of the QFX5100-24Q and they have been solid. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ ju

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5200 and other software than JunOS

hardware as the QFX5100. -- Raphael Mazelier Le 05/12/15 12:02, Robert Hass a écrit : Hi I'm thinking about new QFX5200 and idea of software-less box (whitebox). Please correct me if I'm wrong - can I buy QFX5200 without software and install Cumulus Linux on it as 3rd party software ?

Re: [j-nsp] Multi Core on JUNOS?

ite must be engaged. Btw Junos on intel RE is fast enough for me. But not all on other cpu, specially on EX/QFX one... Perhaps Juniper should install x86 cpu on switch too (other vendor do this). -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing lis

Re: [j-nsp] Multi Core on JUNOS?

that method as well. +1. When I begin to use Junos I was really surprised/frustated that I couldn't use tag/communities on connected, which break the classic logic of redistributing route in junos. That said this is even worse on other network os. -- Raphae

Re: [j-nsp] Static route with tracking

for faster detection. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Multi Core on JUNOS?

rista propose a central/fast db called sysdb to handle communication/sync to other process (see : https://www.arista.com/assets/data/pdf/EOSWhitepaper.pdf for detail). I don't know if was a good/viable approach, but on the paper it seems promising.

Re: [j-nsp] vmx on aws

I heard that aws support is on the roadmap for vsrx. I don't think it make sense for vmx tought. For now older vsrx/firefly might work with some customisation. Le 06/10/15 18:09, Nikos Leontsinis a écrit : Anyone knows if the vmc can be imported as a vm on aws? -- Raphael Maz

Re: [j-nsp] Multi Core on JUNOS?

smp aware. First results are expected in Junos 16 afaik. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper vMX limitations

e is on ge roadmap? Does anyone know? Yes for now the only supported deployment is on top of kvm. But when I asked Juniper, they told me that the vmware support is a priority on the roadmap. btw it was possible to run vmx on vmware but it was a bit tricky. -- Raphae

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper vMX limitations

here is no limitation (except by the ram) of RIB/FIB on version I've tested. On official version if I remember correctly there is a unlimited option. (VMX-PRM-XXX I think). I could be wrong. And I still wait for the vmware support. -- R

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 Build

I think this is good and stable router. In my opinion it would be preferable to have two mx480 (with one RE, one SBC each). In your scenario you'll have a very strong router, but it would not prevent for human error (or software). -- Raphael Mazelier ___

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 Build

I am doing for now with no issues). I had not played with ms-dpc so I don't know if they are good at making ipsec (but as ipsec is a common standard and asas the most common device to make ipsec tunnel, I think this is safe ?). Don't know for the nat.

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ME3600 migration to something with more 10 gig ports

aking between routing instance. Very annoying. - snmp counter on sub interface (but there are workarround) Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX104 Limitations

Hello, I have no the full knowledge to disccussall of the points above, but the real point is where you come from ? mx80 ? and why you need an upgrade to (say) mx104 ? And for what I know: 1. MX104 like MX80 have no SBC, true. They are integrated router. So no redundancy on this point. 2. Y

Re: [j-nsp] VME interfaces and lo0 filters

, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5100 IRB Interface counters

d 4550 to test this release. If it work, this will be a very good news. Even if the firewall filter is functionnal returning to a "normal" behaviour would be good. (mostly for my management/billing system). -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper 10G Switch Options

.. But the situation is moving fastly and newer release fix a log of bugs. But they have 40G ports and higher density than EX4550. EX4550 in the other hand are not perfect, but stable and less expensive. For aggregation swithes with only 10G ports I will go with EX4550. -- Raphae

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX4550 load balancing of MPLS traffic

e a lot of limitation. So if you plan to use EX as P router I advice to carefuly test/stage it. afaik ecmp is not supported on EX. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5100 IRB Interface counters

accomplish this? I would be grateful for any assistance. The best workarround is to use firewall filter counters. I've used this on advice of the list, and it work very well. The only drawback is that you have to find the correct snmp oid for each counter, but it can easily be scripted.

Re: [j-nsp] BGP Route Reflectors

refering to the two main mode of design for RRs : - data traffic pass trough the RR, in band RR - data paths are not trought the RR, out of band RR -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman

Re: [j-nsp] sip calls through srx fail after approx 15 min

Le 29/05/2015 15:42, Philip Wiberg a écrit : Another tip now that alg is discussed, you can disable alg in your custom apps aswell, that way there is no global effect. In The app conf: Application-protocol ignore; Ah yes, you have to put this in your sip-custom application. -- Raphael

Re: [j-nsp] sip calls through srx fail after approx 15 min

- fw sessions ending (idleing) rtp/sip ? - remote ending (keep alive not receveid ??) - local ending (the reverse) - etc... Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] EX3300 : Pbm with inerfaces SFP

t 2 request virtual-chassis vc-port delete pic-slot 1 port 3 Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] L2 tunnel over IP on ex4200-24t

supported. Running 12.3R7 MPLS over RVIs is not working at all. On subif basics features work, and some other don't (l2circuirt for example fail silently). MPLS support on EX is very difficult to work with, features differ between model, the documentation is not up to date, etc... -- R

Re: [j-nsp] L2 tunnel over IP on ex4200-24t

, ccc not. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] L2 tunnel over IP on ex4200-24t

-cli.html Hum on my test even l2circiut (ccc) is not working on EX4200. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Counter on subinterface on EX

ly I had a better budget and more time :) -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Counter on subinterface on EX

Le 11/05/15 11:31, Mark Tinka a écrit : On 11/May/15 11:11, Raphael Mazelier wrote: We have seen this on our EX4550 switches. The uplink toward the upstream routers is an 802.1Q LAG, where the aeX interface graphs actual traffic, but the aeX.Y interface just graphs control traffic

Re: [j-nsp] Counter on subinterface on EX

gured family on the interface with a single term, which just does "count" and "accept". Then I poll those firewall counters. Tore Yes I've read that it could be a solution. Have you notive/hit some performance problems with this config

[j-nsp] Counter on subinterface on EX

s some king of workarround. The goal is to monitoring traffic, and billing. Thks. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] vMX availability

A friendly PLM said the following was okay to post: "VMX FRS is 14.1R5 which is expected to be out by the 1st week of June." Ah good, I ve got a pricelist from Juniper, and price looks ok :) So we can move forward and test. -- Raphae

Re: [j-nsp] Buying a used Juniper

with redundant everything and 4 10G ports. New from Juniper I don't even want to know what these would cost. Lets try it. Juniper can make aggressive price :) -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puc

Re: [j-nsp] vMX availability

rrect, but for RR, vRR or vSrx (Firefly perimeter) should be sufficient (?) Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] vMX availability

Le 30/04/15 22:49, Daniel Rohan a écrit : The good advice I got when I asked this question a few months back was "talk to your SE". I did, and it was fruitful. I ll try it again so :) -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list j

Re: [j-nsp] Thoughts on MX80 v MX104 RE performance

Le 23/04/15 18:22, Saku Ytti a écrit : Since 13.2 you could toggle rpd to 64b mode. Hum interresting. Anyone have feedback about that ? Stability ? -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https

Re: [j-nsp] Thoughts on MX80 v MX104 RE performance

run 32bits.? Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Thoughts on MX80 v MX104 RE performance

inion, and I think the monolithic design of rpd should be rethinked. Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] VRF route leaking on EX4550

Le 21/04/15 16:02, Raphael Mazelier a écrit : Me again. I'm facing a problem when mixing rib-groups export and vrf import/export. When exporting routes from A to vrf X with rib-groups, these routes is candidate to be re-exported in mpbgp VPN X, which is not I want (result in routing

Re: [j-nsp] VRF route leaking on EX4550

Le 20/04/15 17:27, Raphael Mazelier a écrit : In my opinion rib-groups have a more complex syntax than auto-export wich seems natural to me. Anyway with the help of this documentation and templating feature of junos, I ll be able to make a relatively clear configuration. Me again. I&#

Re: [j-nsp] VRF route leaking on EX4550

figuration. Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Thoughts on MX80 v MX104 RE performance

iable for sampled anyway. release in 15.0 ? Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] VRF route leaking on EX4550

y idea ? Am I forced to use rib-group ? and how it will inter-operate with mbgp import/export ? Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Stable JunOS for MX80

stable 11.4 branch. Or use the jtac recommanded version : 12.3R8.7. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Recommended Junos version for EX-4500 virtual chassis

Hi, Currently running 12.3R7.7 with no apparent trouble. Previous versions were exhibiting memory leaks. I'm running dozen of EX4550 VC with 12.3R7.7. Running fine. I've tested 13.2X50, and I'm faced strange routing problem, so I'm stick with the 12.3 train.

Re: [j-nsp] Junos MX series and Andrisoft Flow tools

Le 26/01/15 17:19, sth...@nethelp.no a écrit : As far as I know the software version cannot do IPfix. Yes, software flow are jflow or cflow v5. -- Raphael Mazelier AS39605 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https

Re: [j-nsp] Junos MX series and Andrisoft Flow tools

that juniper have fixed this on higher release, but I m happy with software flow for now. -- Raphael Mazelier AS39605 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Junos MX series and Andrisoft Flow tools

quot;IPFIX with flows Timeout". -- Raphael Mazelier AS39605 Le 26/01/15 05:29, Jordan Whited a écrit : If clocks are sync’d my best guess would be that your active and/or inactive flow timeouts are longer than what is configured on the collector and it doesn’t like that. Try making them

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface / Errata / Update

the mistake (this is pulicly available informations) They both use VPLS but the design slighly differ. Update : Finally the VPLS issue on the France-IX seems to be fixed (with the help of the jtac). No problem since the new release was in production. -- Raphael Mazelier AS39605

Re: [j-nsp] L3 to the rack and L2 services over MPLS

le). For cheaper I end with EX4550 that have correct MPLS/BGP support, and L2Circuit only. Regards, -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt

ed with EX4550 I can confirm that basic MPLS feature are supported (RSVP, LDP signalling, L3VPN, L2circuit), but with slow limit in term of path, vrf, etc... The EX9200 support VPLS but with some bug (thks to the FranceIX to debug the juniper code).

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface SOLVED

300K route approx before rpd crash. So no full view, even only in RIB. After all this cheap switch was making his job. Good value for money. Thks for all. -- Raphael Mazelier AS39605 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net ht

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

loss What could be missing ? Here is my config : http://pastebin.com/bHP9FFsp Thks. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

think it's smarter to use bgp signalling; but l2circuit are acceptable. And no; no filter (I deactivate all filter...) With chip's configuration I've have some traffic (arp in one way), but nothing more. I think there is definitively something wr

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

or one reason or another the mac address of the ce is not learn on the mx80 side ?! I'm just out of luck for this setup :( -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

different tought. Some big IX (Linx, FranceIX) run with vpls topologies on EX9200 series (with some issues :) ). Anyway. Redesigning my network at this stage might be challenging. I will try to let this work, and think about a new design in //. Thks. -- Raphael Mazelier

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

the other the spec of the EX4550 specifie that l2vpn (at least l2circuit) should be working... And some other guys on the list report some kind of success with that. Thks. -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

ting because I think I'm very close, since the L2vpn/L2circuit comes up. I will try to capture the traffic to see what happen (some encapsulation problem). And even if the correct solution is to force my transit customer to use ebgp multihop, I need this plan

Re: [j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

design. It work well, but I does not want to use a dedicated MX80 port and switch to transit customers (wich are not the majority). If I had more money I had bought some MX480 :p -- Raphael Mazelier ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.

[j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

Any suggestions ? or other way to do ? (I ve tested l2circuit and it does not work anyway) -- Raphael Mazelier AS39605 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp