Strange we had no issues upgrading from 17.3R2 from 15.1X.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Gustavo Santos
wrote:
> Yes... Exactly.
>
> I upgraded to 17.3R2 and was a total mess. And had to downgrade to 15.1X
> train.
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:31 AM Colton Conor
> wrote:
>
>> Gustavo,
Yes... Exactly.
I upgraded to 17.3R2 and was a total mess. And had to downgrade to 15.1X
train.
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:31 AM Colton Conor wrote:
> Gustavo,
>
> We you say " Another problem was upgrading to the lastest Junos JTAC
> recommended that made the ACX5048 unusable... ( Junos was
in my office while we worked frantically with the XR TAC about loading
a fix
Aaron
On Jul 11, 2018, at 8:14 AM,
wrote:
>> Of Jackson, William
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 1:28 PM
>> To: 'Colton Conor'; Nick Ryce
>> Cc: Juniper List
>> Subject:
> Of Jackson, William
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 1:28 PM
> To: 'Colton Conor'; Nick Ryce
> Cc: Juniper List
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] QFX5100 vs ACX5048
>
> > colton.co...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Gustavo,
> >
> > We you
I was wondering the same thing in 15.1X54-D51.7 with DHCP-relay on IRB's not
working inside my L3VPN , I mean I was wondering how did that pass internally
testing before it was released. I'm asking that not knowing anything about how
Juniper tests their boxes and code revs... But simply
> colton.co...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Gustavo,
>
> We you say " Another problem was upgrading to the lastest Junos JTAC
> recommended that made the ACX5048 unusable... ( Junos was unable
> to find
> the physical ports..) We had to downgrade to get it back working
> again.."
nfoCenter/index?page=
> prcontent=PR1280492
>
>
>
> This is being resolved in 17.3R3 which is due for release in a couple of
> weeks.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> *From: *Colton Conor
> *Date: *Wednesday, 11 July 2018 at 12:30
> *To: *Nick Ryce
> *Cc: *Gustavo
Nick,
Did you find the PR for this memory leak?
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:02 AM, Nick Ryce wrote:
> If you use BFD, do not upgrade to 17.3R2 as there is a memory leak. Will
> find the PR.
>
> N
>
> On 04/07/2018, 15:31, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Colton Conor" <
>
I don't upgrade software unless I have a good reason to...especially if my
network is fairly stable and I know what I have.
Aaron
> On Jul 4, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>
> Gustavo,
>
> We you say " Another problem was upgrading to the lastest Junos JTAC
> recommended that made
Gustavo,
We you say " Another problem was upgrading to the lastest Junos JTAC
recommended that made the ACX5048 unusable... ( Junos was unable to find
the physical ports..) We had to downgrade to get it back working again.."
what version was this as JTAC recently changed their recommended
On 2/Jul/18 15:22, Aaron Gould wrote:
> Check it out... during "request system software add" junos upgrade on
> ACX5048, prior to the required reboot to make new software active, it's
> interesting how there is mention of QFX :)
It's the same box, as others have stated - just different
Check it out... during "request system software add" junos upgrade on
ACX5048, prior to the required reboot to make new software active, it's
interesting how there is mention of QFX :)
I think this is when I was going from D51 to D61...
...
QFX Installation Software [15.1X54-D61.6]
...
On 2/Jul/18 15:11, Gustavo Santos wrote:
> I had some issues with ACX5048 , the most noticable was arp packets from
> pure L2 vlans and VPLS punting to CPU and flooding the default arp policer
> police..
> JTAC was able to reproduce the issue and gave us an option to disable
> default arp
ACX5048
15.1X54-D61.6
- Aaron
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
I had some issues with ACX5048 , the most noticable was arp packets from
pure L2 vlans and VPLS punting to CPU and flooding the default arp policer
police..
JTAC was able to reproduce the issue and gave us an option to disable
default arp policer until they release a service release to fix this
On 2/Jul/18 13:55, Duane Grant wrote:
> What if it’s Jericho? Then you have something similar to the 5k ncs boxes?
>
> Have you tested Jericho and found significant limitations?
The NCS5000 failed our pre-test checklist from Cisco several months back.
I have to admit, I don't keep track
] QFX5100 vs ACX5048
Not sure what Alexandre is talking about with "vlan leak"
I have bought lots of ACX5048 (about 50 of them) and use them as MPLS PE
edge... For business Ethernet, cell backhaul, residential broadband, ftth, DSL,
cable modem... Mpls l3vpn. Lit up some of the 40 gig
Not sure what Alexandre is talking about with "vlan leak"
I have bought lots of ACX5048 (about 50 of them) and use them as MPLS PE
edge... For business Ethernet, cell backhaul, residential broadband, ftth, DSL,
cable modem... Mpls l3vpn. Lit up some of the 40 gig interfaces lately too
Better in terms of concept. In term of usage, i still investing in qfx5100
Acx5058 Suppose to be a promise of a new future, unfortunately, with all
problematic of the qfx5100 hardware, the acx5048 leak vlan till the last breath
of cpu after that, all deamons and services going down up
What is the main difference between these two boxes? Hardware wise they
look identical. Is there anything on the hardware side that makes the
ACX5048 better than a QFX5100, or is it only software related?
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
20 matches
Mail list logo
