Hello,
Finally, these QFX went in production... with a L2 circuit configured to
bypass this VXLAN issue.
I'm totally giving up VXLAN for a while.
Thank you all for your replies.
Olivier
Le mar. 11 sept. 2018 à 15:03, Alexandre Guimaraes <
alexandre.guimar...@ascenty.com> a écrit :
> Well...
>
>
Well...
From my experience with QFX5100, Q-inQ, does not work at all, only
one(in one) vlan have the right to pass(VXLAN), L2TP Protocols don't have the
rights to pass, funny thing
For years I discuss with local Juniper representative or Juniper team
itself... but... no one
Hi,
On QFX5100 the L2TP/Q-in-Q services has limitations. I have to dig
through my pile of tickets for details... but I remember something
about PVST+ packets not being forwarded at all.
So we just switched everything to MPLS/l2circuits/VLAN CCC (for
now) instead of battling wit
Hey,
The Q-in-Q encapsulation comes from the EX2300 switches to the QFX switches
> (the S-VLAN Q-in-Q tag is also 1001), but on the other end of the tunnel we
> don't have the Q-in-Q frames coming.
>
I am curious if the packets don't leave the ingress VTEP at all or the
tail-end VTEP can't treat
Okay!
Do you have some configurations examples of simple CCC with .1q support
please ?
Does this permit to transit layer2 trafic like STP or LLDP ? And what about
multicast ?
I'm dedicating one physical interface on each QFX to connect the CE devices.
Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 à 21:44, Raphael Mazelie
On 10/09/2018 21:40, Raphael Maunier wrote:
I was about to suggest this .
If you only need to do A to B, I will suggest doing pseudowire instead of Evpn
transport.
But, you cannot end the pseudowire on a sub-if ( on MX you can ), on QFX,
Interface are dedicated to one protocol
Yep simple CC
I was about to suggest this .
If you only need to do A to B, I will suggest doing pseudowire instead of Evpn
transport.
But, you cannot end the pseudowire on a sub-if ( on MX you can ), on QFX,
Interface are dedicated to one protocol
Raphael
On 10/09/2018 21:37, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Oliv
Hello,
Thank you for your answers, very bad news for me :(
There's no solution to make a transparent pseudowire with support of VLAN
tags with my hardware ?
Olivier
Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 à 21:32, Raphael Mazelier a
écrit :
> On 10/09/2018 21:22, Raphael Maunier wrote:
> >
> > There is some limi
On 10/09/2018 21:22, Raphael Maunier wrote:
There is some limitation on the qfx due to the Broadcom chip. On the 10k, you
don’t have all the limitations to the cheap chip ^^
On the 5100 you have a lot of limitation on the 5110, you have less, but not
sure it support the double tag encapsulate
There is some limitation on the qfx due to the Broadcom chip. On the 10k, you
don’t have all the limitations to the cheap chip ^^
On the 5100 you have a lot of limitation on the 5110, you have less, but not
sure it support the double tag encapsulated frames (Broadcom)
I have a bunch of evpn in
Are you trying to push multiple .1q tags onto the VXLAN traffic?
(meaning you're trying to add a C-VLAN *and* a S-VLAN)?
If so, JTAC has told me that QFX series devices (apparently the entire
line...) do not support adding multiple .q1 tags
On 9/10/2018 2:32 PM, Olivier FRUQUET wrote:
Hello,
Hello,
We've got an IP fabric composed with 2 MX204 routers as cores, 2 QFX5110
switches as Provider Edges, and 2 EX2300 as Customer Edges.
The MX and the QFX communicate together with BGP underlay and overlay
groups, the overlay group use evpn signaling.
Everything to run fine except when we want
12 matches
Mail list logo
