0/1]
> 'unit 3107'
>duplicate VLAN-ID on interface
> error: configuration check-out failed
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of Olivier
> Benghozi
> Sent: 12 August 2020 19:12
>
---
From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of Olivier
Benghozi
Sent: 12 August 2020 19:12
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX/QFX vlan-id-list limitation
Hi,
We miraculously found this doc before implementing such QinQ conf on EX4600
(that are low end QFX5100).
So we didn'
Hi,
We miraculously found this doc before implementing such QinQ conf on EX4600
(that are low end QFX5100).
So we didn't try to test the switch with this case, and we directly used such
config: instead of vlan-id-list [some ids], we (nearly) always use the same one
everywhere: vlan-id-list 2-40
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
Has anyone come across PR1395312 before?
“On ACX/EX/QFX platforms, if VLAN ID lists are configured under a single
physical interface, Q-in-Q might stop working for certain VLAN ID lists”.
Very vague.
If our testing, if we go above 7 VLANs (even if it’s within the
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Ralph Smit wrote:
> We're looking for a high-density 10GbE switch and our shortlist consists of;
> the Arista 7124S, Brocade TurboIron 24X, HP 6600-24XG and the EX2500.
ProCurve make a decent switch. Software cli is inconsistent, and
somewhat limited. We manage to
>
> Yes, this is a BNT switch. Juniper have zero plans to adapt this switch to
> run JunOS. In fact, as it stands, the EX2500 will have no L3 functionality
> (according to
> Juniper), whereas if you get this from BNT directly, you will see additional
> features. That, alongside the fact that Jun
>
> You are right here. Its a BLADE G8124 switch. As far as I know this
> switch has good latency performance. I suggest checking the Nexus 5000 too.
>
Yes, this is a BNT switch. Juniper have zero plans to adapt this switch to run
JunOS. In fact, as it stands, the EX2500 will have no L3 fu
--- On Mon, 2/8/10, Tore Anderson wrote:
> From: Tore Anderson
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX-2500
> To: "Ralph Smit"
> Cc: "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
> Date: Monday, February 8, 2010, 2:32 AM
> * Ralph Smit
>
> > I was wondering if an
Hello,
Few weeks ago I asked my Juniper supplier, and he said that EX2500 is OEM
box and it was designed by other vendor for Juniper. Juniper did it to have
a 10G switch in portfolio. I think they are working on 10G switch run with
Junos.
2010/2/8 Ralph Smit
> Hello people,
>
> I was wondering i
cting. Also, we ran into some
pretty nasty bugs on the 4200's with code versions below 9.4R2.9.
HTH,
Keegan
From:
Ralph Smit
To:
"juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net"
Date:
02/08/2010 05:17 AM
Subject:
[j-nsp] Juniper EX-2500
Sent by:
Hello people,
I was wondering if anyone has
* Ralph Smit
> I was wondering if anyone has anyone has any (lab) experience with
> the new Juniper EX-2500 switches. We're looking for a high-density
> 10GbE switch and our shortlist consists of; the Arista 7124S, Brocade
> TurboIron 24X, HP 6600-24XG and the EX2500. Since we currently have
> Jun
Hello people,
I was wondering if anyone has anyone has any (lab) experience with the new
Juniper EX-2500 switches.
We're looking for a high-density 10GbE switch and our shortlist consists of;
the Arista 7124S, Brocade TurboIron 24X, HP 6600-24XG and the EX2500.
Since we currently have Juniper an
Sorry for the followup on my own post, but..
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Dale Shaw wrote:
> The second link (PDF) below seems to indicate IGMP snooping can be
> disabled explicitly on individual interfaces like so:
>
> protocols {
> igmp {
> interface interface-name;
> disable;
> }
Hi again all,
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Dale Shaw wrote:
>
> I'm operating in a bit of an information vacuum here, but I'm trying
> to help out some colleagues with a server NIC teaming / EX switch
> problem.
Here's an update:
My colleagues revisited the problem last night and disabling
Hi Alexandre,
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Alexandre Snarskii wrote:
>
> Looks like you're hitting following bug:
>
> PR/492704 EX switch should forward certain unregistered L2 multicast
> packets used by HP NIC teaming
>
> Fixed in 9.3S7.2 for ex-series.
Thanks. Another list member forwarde
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:30:52AM +1100, Dale Shaw wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm operating in a bit of an information vacuum here, but I'm trying
> to help out some colleagues with a server NIC teaming / EX switch
> problem.
Looks like you're hitting following bug:
PR/492704 EX switch should forwar
Hi all,
I'm operating in a bit of an information vacuum here, but I'm trying
to help out some colleagues with a server NIC teaming / EX switch
problem.
The problem as described to me is that some HP servers with teamed
NICs are having connectivity problems when migrating from Cisco to
Juniper LAN
to:bd...@comlinx.com.au]
Sent: dinsdag 5 januari 2010 14:39
To: Niels Ardts
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX - Notification on STP topology change?
Hi Niels
> We sometimes have STP toplogy changes and I would like to have some kind of
> notification for this.
>
Hi Niels
> We sometimes have STP toplogy changes and I would like to have some kind of
> notification for this.
>
> I've already tried doing this with SNMP traps and syslog, but both options
> didnt work. It can be logged to a file via ethernet-switching-options
> trace-options; it shows up in
Hi All,
We sometimes have STP toplogy changes and I would like to have some kind of
notification for this.
I've already tried doing this with SNMP traps and syslog, but both options
didnt work. It can be logged to a file via ethernet-switching-options
trace-options; it shows up in the logs the
er-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Felix Schueren
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:24 AM
To: Brendan Mannella
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bundle with LACP active
Brendan,
> When you say "disabled" LACP d
mean? And how would i bring it up.
Thanks,
Brendan
- Original Message -
From: "Felix Schueren"
To: "Brendan Mannella"
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 4:26:40 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX AE Bu
Brendan,
> When you say "disabled" LACP does that mean make both sides passive?
> Or one side active and the other side passive?
>
> I tryed searching the docs, but all i got out of it was that if both
> sides are set to passive the link will not automatically come up. What
> exactly does that me
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 03:36:47PM -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> > All switches are running 9.5R1.8
>
> Everyone that I've talked to inside Juniper has suggest JUNOS 9.3R3 as
> the suggested version for all of my deployments, but all of my EX
> boxes are 4200 virtual chassis.
I'll definitely s
Brendan,
>
> just wondering if anyone else has experienced any issues with EX
> switches and ae bundles.
>
yes, we have.
> I have a 3200 with ports 0 and 1 in a ae bundle (ae0) with lacp
> active. Those uplink to to a 4200 VC and land on port 0 on each
> switch. Again with lacp active.
>
> For
I am the only person with access to the switches, and I have not committed
any new config in days.
On 5/26/09 3:36 PM, "Ross Vandegrift" wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 02:18:25PM -0400, Brendan Mannella wrote:
>> just wondering if anyone else has experienced any issues with EX
>> switches a
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 02:18:25PM -0400, Brendan Mannella wrote:
> just wondering if anyone else has experienced any issues with EX
> switches and ae bundles.
Very much so.
> For no reason the bundle has been flapping at random, a few times
> per day. The physical interfaces never flap, just th
All,
just wondering if anyone else has experienced any issues with EX switches and
ae bundles.
I have a 3200 with ports 0 and 1 in a ae bundle (ae0) with lacp active. Those
uplink to to a 4200 VC and land on port 0 on each switch. Again with lacp
active.
For no reason the bundle ha
> -Original Message-
> From: David Ball [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 12:15 PM
> To: Eric Van Tol
> Cc: Rubens Kuhl Jr.; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX
>
> Hi Eric. Aviva Garrett (of JunOS Cookbook fame
> -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Ball
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 10:54 PM
> > To: Rubens Kuhl Jr.
> > Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX
&
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Ball
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 10:54 PM
> To: Rubens Kuhl Jr.
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX
>
> I sat throug
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 08:53:49PM -0600, David Ball wrote:
> I sat through the EX presentation given by our account team a month
> or 2 ago. To me, they look to have tremendous potential. However,
> the lack of features currently supported for an SP environment are
> what's keeping it out of o
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:34:25 -0700, Jonathan Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> Nope, only virtual* present is the virtual-chassis config.
oh dear, i made a mistake ;). You are right.
I had a look to an ERX instead of an EX.
My fault.
Best regards,
Olaf
_
t; ##
> >
> > So I'd say that is a no... might just be a currently unsupported thing
> though.
> >
> > -Jonathan
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rubens
s Kuhl
> Jr.
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 3:04 PM
> To: Juniper-Nsp
> Subject: [j-nsp] Juniper EX
>
> I'm considering Juniper EX series for a new Metro Ethernet project,
> but the specs on the site haven't answered some doubts.
>
> - Does the EX has some "V
nal Message-
From: Olaf Baumert - JNSP [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 4:22 PM
To: Jonathan Crawford
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper EX
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:38:08 -0700, Jonathan Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> It h
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:38:08 -0700, Jonathan Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> It has this nice error in the config block when you add it...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> show configuration routing-instances
what about virtual-routers?
IIRC the ERX considers Layer1-Layer2 to the "context" default
g though.
-Jonathan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl Jr.
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 3:04 PM
To: Juniper-Nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] Juniper EX
I'm considering Juniper EX series for a new Metro Ethernet project,
but the specs on the
I'm considering Juniper EX series for a new Metro Ethernet project,
but the specs on the site haven't answered some doubts.
- Does the EX has some "VRF-Lite" capability, i.e., multiple routing
tables, attachment of interfaces and protocol instances to different
contexts ? No MPLS involved, just pl
39 matches
Mail list logo
