Hi
Ex4300 is fine with license and as I said one of the two carriers is
working.
As far as I understood the carrier with problems is providing q-in-q
tunneling but I still have to get a confirmation on that.
@Chuck, wan macsec or macsec is not an ieee standard? Juniper doesn't have
any different
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 05:24:53PM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 05:35:42PM -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> > Ask your Juniper rep for a feature that Cisco calls "WAN MACsec".
>
> Juniper calls it MACsec.
"WAN MACsec" is a slightly modified version that Cisco made in order
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 05:35:42PM -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> Ask your Juniper rep for a feature that Cisco calls "WAN MACsec".
Juniper calls it MACsec.
The OP probably needs to make sure the firmware is correct for his platform.
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/task/c
Ask your Juniper rep for a feature that Cisco calls "WAN MACsec".
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:01:37PM +0200, james list wrote:
> Dear experts,
> I have a virtual chassis of ex4300 connected to another vc of ex4300 with 2
> x 1 Gbs links provided by two carriers.
>
> Lacp aggregation is up with jus
Dear experts,
I have a virtual chassis of ex4300 connected to another vc of ex4300 with 2
x 1 Gbs links provided by two carriers.
Lacp aggregation is up with just one carrier1 link encrypted with macsec,
unfortunately carrier2 is not going to find the problem and macsec packet
are not transported.
5 matches
Mail list logo
