.
And "MAC Addresses" is the number of MAC-to-Port mappings. So if i build a
network with multiple switches connected one after another, I will only be able to build
a network with up to 32k hosts. Is that correct?
Regards
v
___
juniper-nsp ma
-channel-configuring.html
http://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos15.1/topics/concept/interfaces-naming-conventions.html
Regards,
v
Am 2016-06-16 um 06:59 schrieb Chris Kawchuk:
Likely to make you buy a QFX5100/5100-48T/5100-96/xxx5048 instead. (or
son-of-QFX...). Speculation thinks that
Now I understand - thank you very much for your explanations!
Am 2016-05-31 um 13:31 schrieb Vincent Bernat:
❦ 31 mai 2016 13:12 CEST, v :
I just read about using independent /32 addresses for interfaces and I
would like to know whether anybody uses that. Found the following
information
the IGP to provide this relationship
-This significantly reduces the burden of address management and synchronization
-Also, reconfiguration of topology is much easier
Are there more pros and cons than that?
Does anyone have experience with such a configuration?
Regards,
v
ess/prefix-length]"?
Regards,
v
Am 2016-05-09 um 14:19 schrieb Raphael Maunier:
Here the config for the 2 re
groups {
re0 {
system {
host-name re0.mx1.fqdn;
}
interfaces {
fxp0 {
unit 0 {
rface address for the re0 configuration group:
[edit groups]
root@host# set re0 interfaces lo0 unit 0 family inet address
address/prefix-length"
Why do I need to give the re0 group a loopback interface address in the first
place?
What address should I give to the loopback interface?
Thanks!
Are there any differences or disadvantages compared to a "real" SFP+ port?
(apart from the breakout cable that is)
Regards,
v
Am 2016-03-17 um 13:15 schrieb Bill Blackford:
I haven't done this with an EX4600, but it is most likely the same. You need a
40G optic and
ch as the EX4550 (which has 32
SFP+ ports). If we could split up the QSFP+ ports on the EX4600 to have 40
fully featured SFP+ ports that would be awesome.
Regards,
v
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/ma
%?
Or will half of the ports on each line card become inactive?
Regards
v
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
that with the
smaller REs it can take ages. :)
Regards
v
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Hello :)
To me it sounds like a routing issue - if you remove an IP-interface and
then it works, then check the connectivity over this interface. Can you
ping the host you want to SSH to?
Could it be that the IP-interface it not configured correctly but you are
routing the traffic over this inter
A generate route can send traffic over a next hop that is a contributing
route, aggregate route can't. If you define an aggregate route and if
the next hop is a contributing route to the aggregate route than the
route would be a hidden route. If you need to summarize the 10.100.0.0
network and th
Hi,
Has anyone configured RSVP LSP between Juniper M series router and the
Cisco ISO SR series router.
>From the error message on the Juniper side (see below), it show that the
Cisco side is not configured for RSVP.
Does anyone have any ideas?
Thanks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] run show mpls lsp de
13 matches
Mail list logo
