...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Abel Alejandro
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 9:07 PM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [j-nsp] Load balance on AE MX960
Hello,
I have a pair of MX960 with a simple l2circuit connection. My two PE-PE
interfaces are load sharing the traffic almost perfectly
Hello,
I have a pair of MX960 with a simple l2circuit connection. My two PE-PE
interfaces are load sharing the traffic almost perfectly.
However the CE interfaces, which are aggregated interfaces, are only
using one link for egress.
+-++-+
gt;>
>> What I find weird is you do have some egress traffic on both physical
>> links. It's just not even close to being balanced. Without any load
>> balancing configs, I would expect to see 0 bps on one link. Do you have
>> enough flows? If most of your traffic is
le to get much better.
>
> Serge
>
>
> - Original Message
> From: Gabriel Farias
> To: mail-list
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net; uniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> Sent: Mon, April 5, 2010 1:20:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
>
> Ste
nether.net; uniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
Sent: Mon, April 5, 2010 1:20:33 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
Stefan,
This configuration has no effect, because the connection (PE x CE) uses EBGP
routing within the VRF dados.
What I need is to balance the outbound traffic o
(8756 pps)
>> >
>> > {master}
>> > RT110> show interfaces ge-3/0/3 | match rate
>> > Input rate : 288075200 bps (57232 pps)
>> > Output rate: 657782056 bps (129224 pps)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
w route
>> forwarding-table destination x.x.x.x' for the route you are trying to
>> load-balance.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> Stefan Fouant
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>> --
>>
alance.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Stefan Fouant
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> --
> *From: * Gabriel Farias
> *Date: *Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:51:04 -0300
> *To: *
> *Cc: *;
> *Subject: *Re: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
>
> I'm not using E
my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Gabriel Farias
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:51:04
To:
Cc: ;
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
I'm not using EBGP external type in PE (M120)
Reagards,
Gabriel Farias
2010/3/31 Stefan Fouant
> Do you have mu
Farias
> *Date: *Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:32:18 -0300
> *To: *
> *Cc: *;
> *Subject: *Re: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
>
> I have a section between EBGP VRF PE x CE via two physical connections
> (aggregate ethernet) and see the traffic unbalanced because the Junos uses
>
Do you have multi-path enabled on your EBGP sessions?
Stefan Fouant
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Gabriel Farias
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:32:18
To:
Cc: ;
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
I have a section between EBGP VRF PE x CE
ance
> per-packet'
>
> Sorry for the top-post, I'm on my Blackberry.
>
> HTHs.
>
> Stefan Fouant
> --Original Message--
> From: Gabriel Farias
> Sender: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [j-nsp] Load
om: Gabriel Farias
Sender: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [j-nsp] Load Balance in VRF by Junos
Sent: Mar 31, 2010 4:23 PM
Hi members,
How to balance traffic between EBGP equipment Juniper M120 (PE) x Cisco 6509
(CE) Switch, which are connected via ether
Hi members,
How to balance traffic between EBGP equipment Juniper M120 (PE) x Cisco 6509
(CE) Switch, which are connected via ethernet aggregated?
I used the setup below and did not work the Juniper continues with the
output unbalanced traffic.
configuration forwarding-options
load-balance
time=80.231 ms
===
-Original Message-
From: Erdem Sener [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:54 PM
To: sunnyday
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] load balance traffic
Hi,
Can you check if you have "system default-address-selection"
configured? If it's there, delete it an
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sunnyday
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 1:12 PM
To: Juniper-Nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] load balance traffic
Hello I have a j router with 2 adsl cards they have been assigned ip
address from the bras.
pp0.0 upup inet 10.11.11.7
Hello I have a j router with 2 adsl cards they have been assigned ip
address from the bras.
pp0.0 upup inet 10.11.11.7 --> 1.1.1.1
pp0.1 upup inet 10.11.11.8 --> 1.1.1.1
the problem is that only one adsl card(
?
-Original Message-
From: Masood Ahmad Shah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:39 PM
To: 'Mike'; 'Juniper-Nsp'
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Load balance with 2 adsl pics
I guess you have two static routes. If this is the case, as you know first
of all the
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:10 PM
To: Juniper-Nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] Load balance with 2 adsl pics
Hello
I have a j router with 2 adsl pics is possible to load balance
traffic
between the 2 cards? And if so via Multilink? Or there is
---
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:10 PM
> To: Juniper-Nsp
> Subject: [j-nsp] Load balance with 2 adsl pics
>
> Hello
>
> I have a j router with 2 adsl pics is possible to load
-policy/htm
l/policy-actions-config11.html
Regards,
Masood Ahmad Shah
BLOG: http://www.weblogs.com.pk/jahil
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:10 PM
To: Juniper-Nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] Load balance with 2 adsl pics
Hello
I have a j router with 2 adsl pics is possible to load balance traffic
between the 2 cards?
And if so via Multilink?
Or there is some other way to do so?
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/m
Hello
I have a j router with 2 adsl pics is possible to load balance traffic
between the 2 cards? And if so via Multilink? Or there is some other way to
do so?
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/lis
bps (0 pps)
Output rate: 0 bps (0 pps)
-Original Message-
From: Ilker YILMAZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 6:20 PM
To: 'Stefan Fouant'
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; 'juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Load-Balance o
ECTED]; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
Yep, you can't run Layer 2 and Layer 3 services on that PIC at the same
time. If you've got the sp interface configured, it sounds to me like you
might have some Layer 3 services configured.
I
it to be sure..
>
> Any clues about it?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Fouant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 5:55 PM
> To: Ilker YILMAZ
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-B
: Ilker YILMAZ
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
Dude... it's lsq-x/x/x... x/x/x corresponds to whatever FPC/PIC combination
you've got your AS or MS PIC installed. The slot should always be 0 on
these interfaces. S
2008 12:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
>
>> Do you know which interface naming is available at J4350 & M10i for MLPPP
> ?
>> I see ls-0/0/0 interface at J4350 and lsi.x at M10
e 26, 2008 12:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
> Do you know which interface naming is available at J4350 & M10i for MLPPP
?
> I see ls-0/0/0 interface at J4350 and lsi.x at M10i (Includes MSPIC)
Interface
> Do you know which interface naming is available at J4350 & M10i for MLPPP ?
> I see ls-0/0/0 interface at J4350 and lsi.x at M10i (Includes MSPIC)
Interface naming depends on what PICs you have. Here's an example from
an M7i with ASM, channelized STM-1 and 4 E1s in a bundle using the ASM:
e1-0/
C)
>>>
>>> Are these ok?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Ilker
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 1:42 PM
>>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>&
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 1:42 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
>>
>>>
PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 1:42 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
>
>> I'm curious if anybody knows a workaround doing load balancing per
>> packet on an m10i. I
2008 1:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Load-Balance on Internet Processor II
> I'm curious if anybody knows a workaround doing load balancing per
> packet on an m10i. I have a J4350 2xE1 connected to a M10i 2xE1 trying
> to do my best b
> I'm curious if anybody knows a workaround doing load balancing per packet on
> an m10i. I have a J4350 2xE1 connected to a M10i 2xE1 trying to do my best
> but as Juniper says;
Sorry, can't be done. Load balancing will be per flow, as you have already
found out. If you need to have the full 2xE1
Dear Group,
I'm curious if anybody knows a workaround doing load balancing per packet on
an m10i. I have a J4350 2xE1 connected to a M10i 2xE1 trying to do my best
but as Juniper says;
"an Internet Processor II ASIC sends packets with the same parameters to the
same next hop, since they are in
Hi
To load balance, as a knob you can play with some CoS.
You can change the forwarding-class with a policer if some bw-limit is
exceeded. This changes the EXP field of the label and can help you to get a
different hash. with two hashes you have a chance to use secondary path.
Kind Regards
Arda
O
You could try another technique, which is to manually associate the
L2VPN and a particular LSP.
This way you have 2 LSPs (lets say you use autoBW and least-fill) to
encourage the LSPs to use different egress ports (you could also
force this using EROs). At this point, you need to use polici
Hi FJ,
The least fill command is for tie breaking in creating a LSP in case of
there are more than one link that are eligible for LSP creation. It is not
for load balancing of the LSP traffic itself.
Regards,
Benny
On 9/26/07, Farhan Jaffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks All,
>
> I have a
Thanks All,
I have already tried that stuff & i am noticing that per packet load
balancing is not achieved.
Is there any other technique to load balance multiple E1s b/w two PEs? What
do you say if i make single LSP & put 'least-fill' option. Will it help?
Regards
-FJ
On 9/26/07, Ariff Premji <
Farhan,
Not knowing much about the traffic or the number of VPNs, a couple of
things you can try without the multi-link feature set:
forwarding-options {
hash-key {
family inet {
layer-3;
layer-4;
}
family mpls {
label-1;
IMHO, Juniper doesnt support load balanced LSP for L2VPN because to do load
balance, Juniper need to hash the MPLS label and it is on the
forwarding-options hash-key family mpls hierarchy. Currently they support
MPLS label 1 and 2 (outer and inner) label on the packet so if you are doing
load balan
Hi,
I am doing in house testing of MPLS based L2 VPN, but stuck at this
position. While i doing load balancing b/w two LSPs, it's not working.
Let me explain the scenaio:
Two Routers (M7i & J6350) back to back connected with 2 E1s. I establish one
LSP with one E1 & the other with another. Uneven
According to Juniper's documents
Link Service PIC:
Hardware features
- Rate limiting/policing per multilink bundle
- Byte-wise load balancing across multilink bundles
- Bonding T1 links enable service ranging from 1.5 Mbps through 12
Mbps
- Bonding E1 links enable service ranging
Although Giuliano asked how many channels can be bundled using MLPPP,
I think that the question can be answered also by using parallel IP
paths.
On M-series routers running on IP2, JunOS supports 16 equal cost
paths, isn't it ? How many equal cost paths does J-series routers
support ? Can the equa
Giuliano,
You can have 8 links per bundle. If you want to bundle
all 12 links you'll need to configure two separate
bundles.
Hths
Jared
--- "Giuliano (UOL)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Cisco routers has a limit of 6 Serial Interfaces,
> when used with MLPPP
> load balance.
>
Hello All,
Cisco routers has a limit of 6 Serial Interfaces, when used with MLPPP
load balance.
Juniper J-Series has some limits about it ?
Can I use 6 JX-2SERIAL-S with 12 interfaces load balanced at same time ?
Thanks a lot,
Giuliano
___
juniper-
Hi All,
Has anyone configured load-balancing on the LDP over RSVP tunneling based? Is
M10i chassis support that feature?
Thanks,
Benny
-
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
___
juniper-nsp mailing l
48 matches
Mail list logo
