Ha! I'm glad you like my photo. The sticker is still on there - I'm just
waiting for the boss to tell me to remove it :P
- Chris aka IPv6Freely
--
Chris Jones
CCNP, JNCIA-M
Senior Systems Manager
Pittsburg State University
E-mail: cjo...@pittstate.edu
Phone: 1.620.235.4158
--
"The production
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 01:48:26PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> configure any interface as follows
> interfaces {
> ge-0/0/0 {
> ether-options {
> speed {
> 1g;
> }
> 802.3ad ae0;
> }
> }
>
> JUNOS 9.4 won't let you configure that, but the upgrade validator does
>
On Friday 03 April 2009 04:37:42 pm michael.fi...@bt.com
wrote:
> I personally would be happier with the release cycle
> being halved - if a new release only came out every 6
> months, but each release was better tested and supported,
> then I think the end result would actually be a better
> pro
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 07:57:10AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, michael.fi...@bt.com said:
> > Isn't that what the JunOS EEOL (extended end of life) releases
> > should be (or more probably could be)?
> >
> > Juniper already have these releases they guarantee to support for 3 yea
Once upon a time, michael.fi...@bt.com said:
> Isn't that what the JunOS EEOL (extended end of life) releases
> should be (or more probably could be)?
>
> Juniper already have these releases they guarantee to support for 3 years.
>
> All (!?) they would need to do is to release more 'R' releases
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 09:57:36AM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote:
> I realize that Juniper have to make a new release every
> quarter, and in most (if not all) cases, there is some new
> feature which has the potential to cause "badness" to
> systems that are already working fine.
>
> I think what I'
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
> Sent: 03 April 2009 02:58
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Cc: Richard A Steenbergen
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 9.4
On Friday 03 April 2009 09:52:58 am Cord MacLeod wrote:
> Apparently my Juniper reps are completely different from
> yours, I've been recommended by them not to run 9.4 on my
> ex platform as of yet. and stick with 9.3R2.8, which I've
> not run into a bug with yet. (save a minor annoying
> missin
On Friday 03 April 2009 09:14:28 am Richard A Steenbergen
wrote:
> Dare I ask who you're defending here? In all honesty,
> with respect to the quality and time/attention that goes
> into the software development and QA process of new
> software, JUNOS has gone massively down hill lately.
> Anyone
Apparently my Juniper reps are completely different from yours, I've
been recommended by them not to run 9.4 on my ex platform as of yet.
and stick with 9.3R2.8, which I've not run into a bug with yet. (save
a minor annoying missing feature of "except" in the ACL)
On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:48
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:39:16PM -0600, Tommy Perniciaro wrote:
> I got something for everyone.
>
> http://photos-f.ll.facebook.com/photos-ll-snc1/v2439/7/22/80403768/n80403768_31273893_6328.jpg
>
> And that's the truth!
You forgot to include a URL to where we can get some of those. :)
--
Ri
I got something for everyone.
http://photos-f.ll.facebook.com/photos-ll-snc1/v2439/7/22/80403768/n80403768_31273893_6328.jpg
And that's the truth!
On 4/2/09 4:25 PM, "Robert Raszuk" wrote:
Hi Richard,
> Honestly, I think you should just give up now and accept the fact that
> Juniper is th
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 04:25:14PM -0700, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> > Honestly, I think you should just give up now and accept the fact that
> > Juniper is the new Cisco.
>
> Excuse me ? Cisco in vast majority of new products is way much better
> now. Yes historically there was an issue with IOS, bu
Hi Richard,
> Honestly, I think you should just give up now and accept the fact that
> Juniper is the new Cisco.
Excuse me ? Cisco in vast majority of new products is way much better
now. Yes historically there was an issue with IOS, but AFAIK that has
been also fixed now.
* Look at highly d
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 01:48:26PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Dearest Juniper, please pay more attention to validating configs in
> newer JUNOS vs configs that are allowed on older EX-series software.
Honestly, I think you should just give up now and accept the fact that
Juniper is the new Cis
Upon upgrading an EX4200 stack from 9.2R2.15 to 9.4R2.9, I found that
some damned process, chassism or something, was crashing repeatedly and
preventing any interfaces from coming up. I wish I had taken the time
to note which process it was, but the following will reproduce it.
configure any inte
16 matches
Mail list logo
