[j-nsp] urgent srx policy address issue

stumped on this set security policies from-zone Untrust to-zone DMZ policy 39 match destination-address metro_80_195_69_29 set security zones security-zone Untrust address-book address metro_80_195_69_29 80.195.69.29/32 I am commit checking to recieve commit check [edit security policies

Re: [j-nsp] urgent srx policy address issue

In the Policy you are configuring metro_80_195_69_29 as destination-address means all addresses define in DMZ zone (to-zone). Where as you are defining metro_80_195_69_29 in Untrust Zone. Regards, Muhammad Atif Jauhar (+966-56-00-04-985) On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Evan Williams

[j-nsp] Urgent advice needed...possible CWDM module conflict, can't keep link.

Hi all. I'm doing some work migrating from some brocade routers to a couple MX480's. The client currently uses CWDM between two sites, and the brocades handle the SFP's fine. We popped them into the MX480's and link came up and down a few times according to logs (though I could never catch it in

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent advice needed...possible CWDM module conflict, can't keep link.

If the optics support DOM (Digital Optic Monitoring), what is the received signal power when you issue the following command ? show interface diagnostics optic ge-X/X/X ? Then compare it to the specs of the optic, maybe when you moved the optic and fiber you added some attenuation of the fiber

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent advice needed...possible CWDM module conflict, can't keep link.

It looks like you're using SFP+ ? Are you sure it's CWDM ? Usually 10G modules are DWDM because the wavelengths around 1550nm are better in terms of attenuation. Can you give the brand and model of the WDM optics you're using so we can check -9.6 dBm in reception is within the acceptable power

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent advice needed...possible CWDM module conflict, can't keep link.

This is what the optic diagnostic looked like last night. Physical interface: xe-2/0/1 Laser bias current: 68.304 mA Laser output power: 1.1930 mW / 0.77 dBm Module temperature: 25 degrees C / 77 degrees F

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent advice needed...possible CWDM module conflict, can't keep link.

Hi Morgan, we had troubles on EX4500 with certain xWDM SFP+ (toggling link states like you described) and/or neighbor combinations as well. In our case we could fix it with the SFP+ vendor* engineering department as they offered a modified product. HTH, /Rene * Contact me off-list for

[j-nsp] Urgent reply required

Hi, I have following topology ospf Agilentrouter I am pumping type 5 ext LSA from agilent to the router. I observe in the ospf database, i am seeing Extern LSA, but i dont see it in the routing table. What could be the

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent reply required

The router does need to know who is the ASBR otherwise it won't install this route in the RIB. So the router need to have a LSA type 4 present in the ospf database. JNCIS Study Guide page 85. HTH ./diogo -montagner On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 12:17 PM, chandrasekaran iyer shekar1...@gmail.com

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent reply required

I don't know about anyone else, but I'd really appreciate it, if every post you posted wasn't 'urgent'. We're not here to serve you. -Shane On 22/12/2009, at 10:17 PM, chandrasekaran iyer wrote: Hi, I have following topology ospf

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent reply required

What? this isn't JTAC? =) Regards, - Chris. On 2009-12-22, at 7:22 AM, Shane Short wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I'd really appreciate it, if every post you posted wasn't 'urgent'. We're not here to serve you. -Shane On 22/12/2009, at 10:17 PM, chandrasekaran iyer

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent

; } } } } } } BR Janez -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Pekka Savola Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 7:39 AM To: Masood Shah Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Urgent On Thu, 17 Dec 2009

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent

Hi Shekhar u can type this question on juniper.net site u will get the answer proper way thanks Dilip On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:09 AM, chandrasekaran iyer shekar1...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, How to enable DHCP server in MX240:MX480:MX960 platforms -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B --

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent

Subject: [j-nsp] Urgent Hi, How to enable DHCP server in MX240:MX480:MX960 platforms -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B -- ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent

. From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of chandrasekaran iyer Sent: Thu 12/17/2009 6:39 To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [j-nsp] Urgent Hi, How to enable DHCP server in MX240:MX480:MX960 platforms -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B

[j-nsp] Urgent

Hi, How to enable DHCP server in MX240:MX480:MX960 platforms -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B -- ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent

Is it supported. On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:09 AM, chandrasekaran iyer shekar1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, How to enable DHCP server in MX240:MX480:MX960 platforms -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B -- -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B -- ___

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent downgrade pic

On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 5:56 PM, chandrasekaran iyer shekar1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Nilesh,  What i was observing FPC is detected but the corresponding interface is not seen in run show interface terse output like  xe-6/0/0,xe-6/0/1 not seen or ge-4/0/0,ge-4/0/1 not seen but some other

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent downgrade pic

Hi Shekar, Is there any specific reason, you downgrading from 9.4 to 7.2? Which type of interfaces are not coming up? Most likely they are not supported in 7.2. You need to check Supported PIC page in the external documentation to find the release the particular PIC is supported from For example

[j-nsp] Urgent downgrade pic

Hi, Has anyone downgraded the PIC? how to do it? Which PICs are supported by 6.1 release. -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B -- ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent downgrade pic

On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 15:19 +0530, chandrasekaran iyer wrote: Has anyone downgraded the PIC? how to do it? Which PICs are supported by 6.1 release. downgrade the PIC? What exactly do you want to achieve? And I'm more curious about why you would want to run JUNOS version that's EOLd over 5

Re: [j-nsp] Urgent downgrade pic

On 11/11/2009, at 9:17 PM, Daniel Verlouw wrote: On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 15:19 +0530, chandrasekaran iyer wrote: Has anyone downgraded the PIC? how to do it? Which PICs are supported by 6.1 release. downgrade the PIC? What exactly do you want to achieve? And I'm more curious about why you

[j-nsp] urgent

Hi all, I would like to run ospf over aggregated interface (say ae2) and check neighborship comes up, also ping to other end. I need sample configs, show commands to check aggregated bundle and ospf over aggregated bundle. -- Thanks with regards Shekar.B --

Re: [j-nsp] urgent

#show interfaces fe-0/0/0 fastether-options { 802.3ad ae0; } r3# show interfaces ae0 vlan-tagging; aggregated-ether-options { minimum-links 2; } #show chassis aggregated-devices ethernet { device-count 1; } set protocols ospf area area-id interface ae0.(unit number) And you are all set... show