Re: [j-nsp] proxy-arp on EVPN irb

, 2023 2:25 PM To: Aaron1 Cc: Jackson, William ; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proxy-arp on EVPN irb ** WARNING: This email originates from outside of the organisation ** Hi It seems that proxy arp is disabled by default: proxy-arp | Junos OS | Juniper Networks<ht

[j-nsp] proxy-arp on EVPN irb

Hi Maybe somebody knows the answer to this one: We migrated some customers to an EVPN domain away from a legacy node that used proxy-arp on its L3 interface. The downstream clients have some funky routing and they are relying on proxy-arp to resolve an offnet address (don't ask me why for our

Re: [j-nsp] MX304 Port Layout

>The MX204 is an MPC7E, so whatever H-QoS is on the MPC7E is what the >MX204 will also do. >We have used them as an edge router on a temporary basis at new sites, >with an Arista switch hanging off of them via an 802.1Q trunk, until we >can get our standard MX480 to site. They are capable for

Re: [j-nsp] Vlan 111 on EVPN-VXLAN

We ran into a limitation on qfx5100 where you could not define more than "8?" conditions Ie: Vlan members [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] would fail But Vlan members [ 1-9 10 20-25 ] would work Chipset limitation if I recall. Best to open a JTAC case -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX204 port 1G

Rename the interface ge-0/1/4 admin@mx1> show interfaces xe-0/1/4 Physical interface: xe-0/1/4, Enabled, Physical link is Up Interface index: 154, SNMP ifIndex: 530 Description: TEST Link-level type: Ethernet, MTU: 1514, MRU: 1522, LAN-PHY mode, Speed:

Re: [j-nsp] QSFP+ to SFP+ adapters

Yes We have used the ones from flexoptix They tend to work correctly, but like you mentioned you lose the DOM and also the optic partcode may not display correctly on a show chassis hardware. Apart from that work quite well. Note: don't bother trying to use these for a fusion setup on the

[j-nsp] EX2300 Code

Hi, I am in the process of getting our first stack of EX2300s ready for production, can anyone recommend any specific versions of junos to run on them? I'm not taking advantage of any advance features, just after something stable :) Cheers, William

[j-nsp] OT? - Juniper UK Account Manager

Hi, I'm having major difficulties getting hold of anyone who can assist me from Juniper UK. It appears the account manager for the London area is no longer responding to messages, could I ask anyone with UK contacts to get in touch with me privately please? Kind Regards, William

[j-nsp] IP Fabric EVPN/VXLAN

Hi Just want to throw this one out there: What are other peoples experiences with the IP Fabric EVPN/VXLAN scenario. I have leaf and spine on qfx5100 with 17.3R3-S3 and MX edge gateways using : I have gone through in order *18.3R1-S1 Disk Space consumption bug *18.3R1-S3 EVPN

Re: [j-nsp] Hyper Mode on MX

Junos Fusion is not supported when hyper-mode is enabled. -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of Franz Georg Köhler Sent: 07 March 2019 12:46 To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Hyper Mode on MX On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 12:31:48PM +0100, Olivier Benghozi

Re: [j-nsp] Segment Routing Real World Deployment (was: VPC mc-lag)

So just to throw a question out there: When I last looked at SR this was a big empty hole when it came to multicast. As we are possibly removing mLDP and RSVP from the network in favour of SR(-TE) what are people doing to fill this void. There were some drafts being worked on last year and if I

Re: [j-nsp] QFX5100 vs ACX5048

> colton.co...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Gustavo, > > We you say " Another problem was upgrading to the lastest Junos JTAC > recommended that made the ACX5048 unusable... ( Junos was unable > to find > the physical ports..) We had to downgrade to get it back working > again.."

Re: [j-nsp] Equipment Labelling

Looks good, I get one made up and give some feedback. -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chuck Anderson Sent: 07 May 2018 02:25 To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Equipment Labelling We think a M3.5-.07 is the

[j-nsp] Equipment Labelling

Hi I have noticed that with more modern pieces of equipment, such as qfx switches, that there is very little real estate to place tags/labels to identify the equipment. We have multiple qfx switches stacked in a rack and they have different uses ( IP Fabric, Fusion Satellites ). At the

Re: [j-nsp] Moving onto EX2300

need to check the finer details with Juniper. Cheers, William On 20 September 2017 at 19:18, Chris Morrow <morr...@ops-netman.net> wrote: > At Wed, 20 Sep 2017 17:03:21 +, > Raphael Maunier <raph...@zoreole.com> wrote: > > > > Not supported at all. > >

[j-nsp] Moving onto EX2300

? Anything to watch out for? Cheers, William ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] MX240 (orMX960) with QFX5100 in Fusion

Been looking at fusion edge with qfx5100 and ex4300. Using 16.X code and so far so good. On 19/07/2017, 21:03, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Alain Hebert" wrote: Hi, Anyone has feedback about Fusion when

Re: [j-nsp] MC-LAG on QFX5100

it would have been a mature technology by now. On 10/07/2017, 19:08, "juniper-nsp on behalf of William McLendon" <juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of wimcl...@gmail.com> wrote: I can’t remember the exact version offhand. it was in the 14.1X53 range I believe.

Re: [j-nsp] MC-LAG on QFX5100

, Will > On Jul 10, 2017, at 1:04 PM, Vincent Bernat <ber...@luffy.cx> wrote: > > ❦ 10 juillet 2017 12:36 -0400, William McLendon <wimcl...@gmail.com> : > >> if you are running a routing protocol over the particular VLAN on the >> MC-LAG peers (which is a supported conf

Re: [j-nsp] MC-LAG on QFX5100

if you are running a routing protocol over the particular VLAN on the MC-LAG peers (which is a supported config in Junos MC-LAG implementation) make sure you are running VRRP between the MC-LAG peers, even though it seems unnecessary. VRRP seems required for any ARP sync to occur for a given

Re: [j-nsp] MC-LAG on QFX5100

ber...@luffy.cx> Cc: Juniper List <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>; Jackson, William <william.jack...@gibtele.com> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MC-LAG on QFX5100 Is there something preventing you from using VCF or qfabric? On Jul 9, 2017 7:25 AM, "Vincent Bernat" <ber...@luffy.cx

[j-nsp] MC-LAG on QFX5100

Hi We have been testing an MC-LAG active/active setup on qfx5100 using the latest 14.1x53 code. We are seeing issues when using L3 in the MC-LAG. We are using IRB with VRRP on a number of vlans that face the downstream client. It seems that in active/active both nodes process traffic even if

[j-nsp] MX480 with new RE's -- Memory mismatch alarms

hey all, curious if anyone has seen this and knows why it happens or if its anything to be concerned about. we received new MX480s with the new 64G Routing Engines where Junos is in a VM, and on both MX480s we have seen messages like the following: MX480-2-re0> show system alarms 2 alarms

Re: [j-nsp] EVPN -VXLAN in production

Yes I have two small pods setup using VXLAN/EVPN with IP Fabric. ( eBGP underlay/iBGP overlay ) D40 is the place to be on code and seems to have fixed most of the problems I had. Seems to work well now. Can get me off list for more details. On 22/11/2016, 15:02, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Amos

Re: [j-nsp] MX series BGP config macros ?

The parameter feature in IOS-XR is very nice, although there are other parts that aren’t so great. I havent seen anything like this on Junos. I must say I believe that this part of Junos has been abandoned somewhat and could do with some developer time. On 05/11/2016, 21:24, "juniper-nsp on

[j-nsp] open source packages to monitor ex2200/vc

Hi list, What is everyone using to monitor their EX2200/VC stacks? We are using check_mk to monitor our network which is great, however due to the way it polls or due to the low power of the ex2200 I'm unable to monitor all the individual interfaces. Cheers, Will

[j-nsp] Junos Fusion Provider Edge

Hi all Any one used Junos Fusion Provider Edge? I was wondering if the aggregation device can be an MX virtual Chassis rather than a single standalone MX? And if using qfx units as satellites, do you need any fancy licenses on them if the smarts are on the MX? Many thanks William Jackson

Re: [j-nsp] Which BOGON filter strategy you would recommend IPv4 and IPv6

Bogons still do a BGP feed with many deaggregated prefixes. http://www.team-cymru.org/bogon-reference.html ( FULLBOGONS ) William Jackson -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Alexander Marhold Sent: 16 February 2016 08:50

Re: [j-nsp] Acx5048 vpls vlan-id

Ran into same limitation, started using the limited vlan remapping capabilities to push a dummy outer vlan ID to make all services share the vpls instance, but there are issues with this so been using separate routing-instances. Ball ache. On 05/02/2016, 21:59, "juniper-nsp on behalf of

Re: [j-nsp] QFX mc-lag and v6 ND (Phil Mayers)

In this case I think they may have over-engineered the process, or there are cases of concern i’m not aware of as to why they did it this way. I have not ever configured Cisco vPC, and I understand it is fairly complicated too, but Juniper’s MC-LAG config requirements seem way too complicated.

Re: [j-nsp] juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 159, Issue 8

I don’t know whether it is officially supported or not, but I was able to get v6 working in a lab environment with MC-LAG, even with OSPF3 running and working over it as well. In v4 world you must configure VRRP to have the ARP sync work properly (this bit us on a MC-LAG running OSPF where one

[j-nsp] Continuous SNMP traps for ospfTxRetransmit alarms

I would have thought there might have been a cli statement to switch between strict RFC and the juniper implementation?? Any comments? thanks William ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo

Re: [j-nsp] Mixed vcf question

is downloaded from the re. If you compare it to Cisco Nexus 2000 series acting as access switches in a fex configuration, they don't require their cam/tcam on the switches but with the drawback of no local traffic forwarding. Br William > 23 jan. 2016 kl. 07:57 skrev Alexander Marhold <alexande

Re: [j-nsp] Mixed vcf question

case) be same as the ex4300. Br William Skickat från min iPad > 21 jan. 2016 kl. 16:22 skrev james list <jameslis...@gmail.com>: > > Hello experts, > > a question regarding a mixed VCF environment with QFX5100 as spine and > QFX5100/EX4300 as leaf. > > >

[j-nsp] Segment Routing ( SPRING )

Hi have been reading cisco documentation on this topic. I was wondering if anyone knew the JUNOS status for this was? Cant find much on the website etc etc. many thanks ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] EX4300 and full-duplex-only

The ex3300 does not have this limitation. William Jackson Gibtelecom Email: william.jack...@gibtele.com -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Frank Sweetser Sent: 23 September 2015 18:05 To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper vMX limitations

Hi Yes I have it running on Centos, using virsh for vm management. Let me know if you need any pointers. // William 1 aug 2015 kl. 18:13 skrev Chris Woodfield rek...@semihuman.com: Has anyone gotten VMX running on a non-Ubuntu KVM machine (ex. RHEL/CentOS)? -C On Jul 30, 2015, at 6

[j-nsp] EX2200 VC SNMP issues

to have a conclusion, I have noticed that EX2200 are quite slow in terms of commits, it seems like its just not up to the job? any help would be appreciated. Kind Regards, William ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https

Re: [j-nsp] EX9200 DHCP Relay

this is a working DHCP config on EX9200s — make sure you include the forward-snooped-clients all-interfaces statement, or any transit DHCP packet that traverses an interface without DHCP relay configured will be eaten by the EX9200 — its the most asinine thing in the world to have (a carryover

Re: [j-nsp] VLAN's on EX4300 with 13.2X50-D15.3

The CLI changes right now only apply to new hardware — EX9200, EX4300, QFX5100. The other EX products still use the “normal” way, even on the latest code. I’m not sure if they are planning on running the ELS syntax on other EX platforms or not. will On Feb 19, 2014, at 12:00 PM,

[j-nsp] EX9200 / MX Minor Alarm - CB 0 Fabric Chip Not Online

hey all, we have an EX9208 that is reporting a Minor alarm as follows: user@hostname show system alarms 2 alarms currently active Alarm time Class Description 2013-09-27 17:40:56 EDT Minor CB 0 Fabric Chip 1 Not Online 2013-09-27 17:40:56 EDT Minor CB 0 Fabric Chip 0 Not

Re: [j-nsp] Junos BNG PPPoE inside a VPLS

The reason for the VPLS use is that we have multiple BNG nodes that load share the PPPoE sessions. And to mitigate single points of failure. I believe Juniper might just be looking into this scenario as well. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list

[j-nsp] Junos BNG PPPoE inside a VPLS

Gents Theoretical question here: I currently have a setup where I transport PPPoE frames between my xDSL boxes and a centralised BNG. I use one vlan tag per xDSL box aggregator box, so all the subs from a specific box have the same vlan tag. xDSL(vlan tagged Eth)--PE--MPLS

Re: [j-nsp] juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 130, Issue 2

do you have Jumbo Frame support enabled across the whole L2 path between the two cluster members? On Sep 3, 2013, at 11:44 AM, juniper-nsp-requ...@puck.nether.net wrote: -- Message: 10 Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 14:19:35 + From: OBrien, Will

Re: [j-nsp] SRX Source NAT internal users to two or more public IPs

I think I may have been able to answer my own question. I stumbled across this KB article which I think spells it out pretty well: http://kb.juniper.net/KB20711 On Jul 18, 2013, at 2:04 PM, William McLendon wimcl...@gmail.com wrote: hi all, We have an issue where we have enough internal

[j-nsp] SRX Source NAT internal users to two or more public IPs

hi all, We have an issue where we have enough internal users and sessions using the general outbound NAT that we are hitting the session limit for the single public IP due to running out of ports. (really its due to how Source NAT is carved up on an HA pair…see http://kb.juniper.net/KB14958 )

Re: [j-nsp] srx cluster - control and data link throuigh cisco

Do you have Jumbo Frames enabled on all paths between the two nodes? There is a required frame MTU that must be supported across the network for connectivity through intermediate switches to work / be supported. Also if i'm not mistaken by default the control plane traffic is tagged with VLAN

[j-nsp] OP script - failing to download code image

hi all, we have a home-grown OP script that we use to bulk upgrade EX switches for new deployments. New switches come out of the box (lately on 11.4R1) and the script executes and auto-upgrades the switch to 11.4R5 or 11.4R6 (tested fine with these). I have been trying to update the script

[j-nsp] Bug or Not?

I have had an issue last weekend with an upstream peer of my transit providers. They have had a route stuck in the forwarding table for 2 weeks. The result of this was that they were pointing one of my prefixes to a specific one of my transits, when that transit was down they were black holing

Re: [j-nsp] NSRP and igmp-snoop

if memory serves the NSRP communication is actually L2 Multicast, so yes enabling IGMP snooping on the switches for the NSRP VLAN likely will cause issues. This same problem effects SRX clusters as well, if i'm not mistaken. Presumably if you had an IGMP Querier on the VLAN then it wouldn't

Re: [j-nsp] Redistribution question.

Import policy is from routing-protocol to routing table. Once you get this life is easier :-) William Jackson NGN Engineering Gibtelecom Email: william.jack...@gibtele.com -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] Junos 12.3 Release Date

I can only hope this is all some sort of terrible documentation error. That list of features requiring an AFL (at least for the EX32/42/45/8200/xre) is counter to how we have been selling and implementing this kit for years. And our Juniper SE informed us a while back that 12.3 would no

Re: [j-nsp] How reliable is EX multichassis? 3300 and 8200

NSR was not supported on EX3300s until 12.1 per the release notes, and 12.2 added NSSU for EX3300s. I did not see mention of NSB in the release notes, but I have to believe it's supported for NSSU to work properly. Unfortunately I do not have access to any EX3300s to test / confirm.

[j-nsp] SRX - tap mode?

hi everyone, do SRX firewalls support a tap mode installation? Really just looking at it for purposes of evaluation of IDP functionality where tap mode would be the least intrusive method to see data vs having to put it inline (and then deal with the inevitable you put a device inline and now

Re: [j-nsp] SRX - tap mode?

this helps, -Tim Eberhard On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:33 AM, William McLendon wimcl...@gmail.com wrote: hi everyone, do SRX firewalls support a tap mode installation? Really just looking at it for purposes of evaluation of IDP functionality where tap mode would be the least intrusive method

Re: [j-nsp] juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 118, Issue 8

Your static NAT config looks correct. do you have any other static NAT rule-sets defined that could match the traffic (initiated from either side)? IIRC a session is only evaluated against a single NAT rule-set per NAT type, and if multiple match, it will pick the most specific. I think the

[j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

Hi Having used the MX80 in a previous position and now being prompted to look at the ASR 9001, I was wondering if any people have operational experience with the ASR9001 platform? Or any thoughts on comparison. These will be used for IPv4/IPv6 eBGP transit and for MPLS L2VPN/VPLS drop offs,

[j-nsp] EX to Cat6500 link?

all, this is an odd issue i'm having in turning up a new circuit, and hoping for some input / ideas -- the link between the EX and the Cat6500 is provided by a 3rd party provider (I think via DWDM - Sienna and Infinera gear). Both the EX and the Cat6500 GigE interfaces are configured as

Re: [j-nsp] EX to Cat6500 link?

. Thanks all that replied on and off list with ideas! Will Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:35:21 -0400 From: William McLendon wimcl...@gmail.com To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] EX to Cat6500 link? Message-ID: 5e853961-bb16-4049-97a3-351c484ea...@gmail.com Content-Type: text

Re: [j-nsp] ldp signaling vpls can't up

looks like you left out 'family mpls' on the core interface ge-0/0/0.14 config, which is required for MPLS to function. will ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] vpls loop avoidance

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Humair Ali humair.s@gmail.com wrote: If you need a shorter mac timeout, you can set the mac aging timer to a lower value than the default 300ms timeout On 20 October 2011 20:28, Sebastian Wiesinger juniper-...@ml.karotte.orgwrote: * Phil Bedard

Re: [j-nsp] Rapid ping gives ping: send to: operation not permitted

Siva, What level (class) are you logging in as? You may have to log into an account that has the appropriate privileges... -Tony On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:50 PM, MSusiva ssiva1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi experts, Whenever I perform rapid ping to external address, it returns ping: send to:

[j-nsp] EX switches and TCAM utilisation

Hi, I'm using some EX3200s running 10.0S6.1 and developing a configuration using filter based forwarding to policy route traffic between routing instances. It's all working fine in the lab but I'm concerned about the potential growth of the firewall policy and utilisation of the TCAM in

Re: [j-nsp] XFP-10G-L-OC192-SR1

and these each contain 12 fibres, to wire to your fibre interconnect frame. Then when service needs to be turned up don't need to touch the router rack, just at interconnection frame ( where install relevant attenuators ). Worked so far for us and save a lot of messing around. Best Regards William Jackson

Re: [j-nsp] configuration doc

. William Collier-Byrd w...@collier-byrd.net On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Deric Kwok deric.kwok2...@gmail.comwrote: Hi I am in Juniper. What is best website and good doc for it? What is different cisco/juniper too? Thank you ___ juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Strange behavior of BGP policy

My punt would be to get rid of the last accept statement. Without it your processing should fall through to the default BGP export policy. At the moment I guess you are accepting everything. Best Regards William Jackson Technical Department Sapphire Networks -Original Message- From

[j-nsp] Strange BGP behaviour on 10.0R3

Hi We are seeing some strange behavior on an MX with 10.0R3. We have an Ethernet link to a switch where we have multiple eBGP peers. We and the peer are seeing the session come up and then expiring with hold-time received messages, other peers on the same segment work 100%. When

[j-nsp] Customer CPE question

Hi We are deploying an access network for L2 Ethernet services using a non juniper manufacturer. This is a product set specifically targeted at these MEF services and is very good and cheap. But is only for L2 services. We have other customers that will only require L3 services. We

[j-nsp] Packet Size Distribution Statistics

Regards William Jackson Technical Department wjack...@sapphire.gi mailto:wjack...@sapphire.gi Sapphire Networks Suite 3.0.3, Eurotowers, P O Box 797, Gibraltar Customer Services * Tel: +350 200 47200 F Fax: +350 200 47272 * E-Mail: enquir...@sapphire.gi mailto:enquir...@sapphire.gi * Web

Re: [j-nsp] Default SRX Behaviour

. Best Regards William Jackson ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Managing MX480 fxp0

What we did as we have different IP ranges that access via the Fxp0 was to NAT on the next-hop router connected to the FXP port. So that all traffic appears to the fxp as if it was directly connected to it. Best Regards William Jackson Technical Department Sapphire Networks -Original

Re: [j-nsp] MX240

I guess one of the big differences for choosing MX240 over MX80 would be the Dual RE capability on the MX240. I have been told by our SE that the MX80 will be able to be clustered like the SRX style cluster in the future. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list

Re: [j-nsp] VPN C-RP for MP-BGP-based MVPN's (NG-MVPN's)

Hi Mark, I think you'll need to fire up MSDP to between the CE and PE to have a C-RP, because juniper does not support native shared-tree for NG-MVPNs in 8.5. Shared-tree support comes in 10.x. I believe NG-MVPN needs to see the source-active to generate the type 5 route. In 9.2 and later BSR is

Re: [j-nsp] any guidance on JNCIP-M

Read the book, study hard. Get hands on, will be hard to pass and go further without hands on. I passed this one in Jan 2010. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] Automating Deployment

Hi all We are wondering how people automate the deployment of juniper customer edge Routers. We were considering using unnumbered Ethernet interfaces on the edge router and on the next upstream nodes so that we do not need to have pre-knowledge of IP addressing. The idea was then to run

Re: [j-nsp] MX960 JunOS recommendations

Hi do you have a PR Number for this issue? -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tima Maryin Sent: 11 November 2009 08:28 To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX960 JunOS recommendations

Re: [j-nsp] Upstream Traffic Manipulation Question

Maybe I am being too basic, but if both remote POPs are from the same ISP, maybe they have communities you can add to set their localpref? What about MED on BGP? William -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

[j-nsp] RSVP LSP question

I am wading my way through the JNCIS-M book and cant find a suitable answer to the following question: Imagine I have an MPLS network and I have multiple services running between the same two PE routers I define multiple RSVP-TE LSPs with different primary and backup paths, bandwidth

[j-nsp] MPLS Route Distinguisher Question

Hi guys Can someone clarify something for me: The Route distinguisher is the VPN instance identifier correct? So it is unique per VPN in the network. And the route target/vrf target is a value that you can assign to prefixes when advertised from local PE router to limit which

[j-nsp] MPLS Question

Hi Just dipping my feet into the world of MPLS and have some quick questions. On my ingress router I am setting up some RSVP label paths with strict ERO's, I add the fast reroute option and the adaptive option. So that the primary and secondary paths are already up. On my transit

[j-nsp] LDP FEC Default Behavior

it have the same behavior or does it create an FEC for every entry in the routing table? William ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

[j-nsp] generate a default route question

I have a test lab where I have an edge router that I want to use to generate a default route into my OSPF process depending on whether an interface is up or not. Code snippets: Show routing-options: generate { route 0.0.0.0/0 { policy generate_default_route; tag

[j-nsp] Service provider SLA reporting Software

Hi I was wondering what software service providers are using to generate SLA reports. IP transit services and MPLS services? Many thanks ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net