Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

T-3B02XCNoyswly-5goWsezlxu684dfw90EMu8jR6hk7aRXfh-3fZYR38_6Zqu5QnWmmiDHHh7Ek8PrJzp6G2rVxHWuBgBPhXcbVaMpS_uB&attredirects=0 > > > -Original Message- > From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of > Vincent Bernat > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 5:03 AM > To:

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

gt;> >> Mat >> >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Josh Baird wrote: >>> >>> No 10G interfaces are unlocked on the base MX104-MX5 bundle. This >>> requires >>> additional licensing. >>> >>> You don't need additional

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

k wrote: > > No. > > >> On 26 Apr 2016, at 9:34 am, Satish Patel wrote: >> >> Also do I need to pay to run BGP? > ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 base model

ug McIntyre wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 06:20:45PM -0400, Satish Patel wrote: >> > I talked to one of vendore he gave me following price for MX80. Does >> > MX80 base model support 20G throughput? or do i need to buy license to >> > use more 20G? >> >

[j-nsp] MX80 base model

I talked to one of vendore he gave me following price for MX80. Does MX80 base model support 20G throughput? or do i need to buy license to use more 20G? in around $17k price. i will get following. Does 4x10GE fix port are locked or i need to unlock them? MX80 Chassis with 2 MIC slot 4x10GE fixed

Re: [j-nsp] ASR 1001 throughput question

x27;re dropping 5g and > transmitting 2g out the other side, i think you'll be fine. you should > check with your cisco se to make sure though. > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Satish Patel wrote: >> >> We are planning to buy Cisco ASR 1001 but base mod

[j-nsp] ASR 1001 throughput question

We are planning to buy Cisco ASR 1001 but base model comes with 2.5G throughput. Here is my requirement and question. Basically we have 10G link and legit traffic is 1G around but most of time we get DDoS attack and because of that we upgrade link to 10G. so let say we get 5G attack on link and we

[j-nsp] Stop IP Fragmentation attack

In our network we are getting IP Fragmentation attack, so attack use NTP or Chargen technic and sending very large packet on network which is filling my network TRUNKs. How do i stop IP Fragmentation attack on Cisco Edge router? I heard ACL can do that but don't know what kind of technique it use

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 vs MX40?

Thanks mark, I asked my friend and he said its CPE router not good for aggregation. As per spaces ASR 920 looks pretty solid. -- Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > >> On 18/Apr/16 15:39, Satish Patel wrote: >> >> O

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 vs MX40?

Other cheap option I have Cisco ASR 920 which has 2 10G fiber port. It hold 20k routes limit but any way we are planning to run default router over BGP Does this router has 20G traffic performance? -- Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 18, 2016, at 3:33 AM, Edward Dore > wrote: > > >> On 18 Ap

[j-nsp] MX80 vs MX40?

My requirement is 10G fiber link terminate on router but in future we can go with 20G link so should i consider MX80 or MX40 (cost wise also) If we buy MX80 so in base model it comes with 4x10G fiber ports right? or do i need to buy them separately after buying MX80 chassis? Additionally do i nee

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco vs Juniper confused

We are seeing attack all over the world, how you will stop them using source blackholing? These day most of people use opendns and chargen style spoofing attack. On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Roland Dobbins wrote: > On 16 Apr 2016, at 19:22, Satish Patel wrote: > >> also in DDo

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco vs Juniper confused

Our ISP doesn't provide S/RTBH , also in DDoS S/RTBH not handy. -- Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 15, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Roland Dobbins wrote: > >> On 16 Apr 2016, at 3:51, Payam Chychi wrote: >> >> its all a very basic concept > > Concur 100%. > > And don't concentrate solely on D/RTBH, which

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco vs Juniper confused

dns...something that makes sense. > > Aaron > > -Original Message- > From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of > Satish Patel > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 4:35 PM > To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: [j-nsp] Cisco vs J

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco vs Juniper confused

aster performance when we will be under water. We are currently using Suricata IDS to detect DDoS which is really great Opensource software. On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Roland Dobbins wrote: > On 15 Apr 2016, at 4:35, Satish Patel wrote: > >> We thought about ASR firewall too but no

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco vs Juniper confused

> wrote: >> >> > What gear do you currently have? What do your filtering rules >> look like? >> > You don't need to buy new gear if your filtering much of the bad >> traffic at >> > the edge using simple ACLs >> >

[j-nsp] Cisco vs Juniper confused

This is my first port here, We are small size of company and now we are getting harsh by DDoS stuff. We have 10G link in our network terminated on L3 Cisco switch and from there other switches. Everything was working great but recently we started seeing DDoS more and more. They are filling 10G link