Can one run full IGP+MP-BGP VPLS/L2VPN/L3VPN on the ex4300?
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Ben Dale bd...@comlinx.com.au wrote:
On 20 Feb 2014, at 6:00 pm, Per Granath per.gran...@gcc.com.cy wrote:
For the mixed VC, the options are EX42+EX4550 or EX43+QFX.
For VC, the EX42 uses
On 20 Feb 2014, at 6:00 pm, Per Granath per.gran...@gcc.com.cy wrote:
For the mixed VC, the options are EX42+EX4550 or EX43+QFX.
For VC, the EX42 uses VCP-cables, while the EX43 uses QSFP-DAC-cables
(assuming you do not want to waste your 10G ports).
EX42 and EX43 has the same price.
weren't the ex4200 VC connections 64/128 Gbps thru the ribbon cable? why is
40G which uses up actual ports all that exciting? maybe i don't see it
because it doesn't apply to my architecture. :-/
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
The VC cables in EX4200s are 32G half duplex. If we go full duplex we get
to 64. Add another VC cable and we get 128.
With the 40G interface, we get 80 full duplex and 160 with 2.
HTH
On 20 February 2014 22:31, ryanL ryan.lan...@gmail.com wrote:
weren't the ex4200 VC connections 64/128
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 02:31:58PM -0800, ryanL wrote:
weren't the ex4200 VC connections 64/128 Gbps thru the ribbon cable? why is
No, 32 Gbps through PCIe x8. Marketing would have you believe it is
128 Gbps, but using their definitions, a 10 GigE port is 40 Gbps. In
reality the VCPs each do
On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 12:25:55 PM Giuliano Cardozo
Medalha wrote:
ex4300 uses next generation cli for L2
Does all this roll over cleanly into an upgrade if you were
running previous generation CLI with earlier code?
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
-requ...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 18:12:37 +0200
From: Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] VLAN's on EX4300 with 13.2X50-D15.3
Message-ID: 201402191812.37822.mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Content-Type: text/plain
Next Gen CLI for layer2. This is the same format as the Layer2 Functions on
the MX. Is this a trend for all EX products or just the NG hardware?
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:25 AM, Giuliano Cardozo Medalha
giuli...@wztech.com.br wrote:
ex4300 uses next generation cli for L2
instead of use
I think the following link can answer it for you:
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos13.2/topics/task/configuration/getting-started-els.html
Enhanced Layer 2 Software
EX4300 switches
13.2X50-D10
EX9200 switches
12.3R2
QFX3500 switches
13.2X50-D15
QFX3600 switches
13.2X50-D15
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Ben Dale bd...@comlinx.com.au wrote:
Also, upgrade your code to 13.2X50-D18 right now. No, really. You'll
thank me later.
+1
Anything less that D17 had some serious stability issues when in a virtual
chassis and up for more than 30 days.
-Jonathan
welp, i was about to pull the trigger and order the ex4300's for a new
rack, but i think i'll stick to the ex4200 for now.
appreciative of people pointing out current issues (even tho i'm not the
original poster).
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
I don't know if I'd call them issues. Just ELS introduces different
configuration hierarchies that is the way things will be in the future. The
functionality is still there even if the config bits change some.
The main advantage of the 4300 vs. 4200 is 4x10G uplinks instead of 2, and 40G
instability while in vc and/or update beyond 30 days kinda sound like
table-stake issues to me.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Aaron Dewell aaron.dew...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't know if I'd call them issues. Just ELS introduces different
configuration hierarchies that is the way things
we have a lot of ex4300 working well with D18 ... dont worry about it
it has 4 sfp+ and 4 qsfp+
it is a better choice
juniper development is very fast about ex4300 code ... a lot of corrections in
some much fast way
Sent from my iPhone
On 19/02/2014, at 17:36, ryanL ryan.lan...@gmail.com
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:53 PM, ryanL ryan.lan...@gmail.com wrote:
instability while in vc and/or update beyond 30 days kinda sound like
table-stake issues to me.
Yeah, as an early adopter this was a bit spicy, but we had an extended
burn-in phase since it was a new platform so it wasn't
On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:47:33 PM Aaron Dewell
wrote:
The main advantage of the 4300 vs. 4200 is 4x10G uplinks
instead of 2, and 40G QSFP+ ports which can be either VC
or routed. It's a lot more flexible platform and much
more compatible with others (read: QFX5100) than the
On 20 Feb 2014, at 11:22 am, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:47:33 PM Aaron Dewell
wrote:
The main advantage of the 4300 vs. 4200 is 4x10G uplinks
instead of 2, and 40G QSFP+ ports which can be either VC
or routed. It's a lot more flexible
: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:48 PM
To: ryanL
Cc: juniper-nsp
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] VLAN's on EX4300 with 13.2X50-D15.3
I don't know if I'd call them issues. Just ELS introduces different
configuration hierarchies that is the way things will be in the future. The
functionality is still there even
Hi,
Why when I have below config:
ge-0/0/44 {
description test;
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan103;
}
storm-control default;
unit 103 {
description test;
It's a name change. vlan is now irb. It depends on platform, but the newer
ones use irb instead of vlan.
So it doesn't work with vlan.103 because the vlan interface physically does not
exist. But you can configure nonexistent interfaces in JunOS.
On Feb 18, 2014, at 9:44 PM, Janusz Wełna
Hi Janusz,
You may want to read through this document too:
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos13.2/topics/task/configuration/getting-started-els.html
there are quite a few changes to the way you're used to doing things with VLANs
and interfaces on EX4300s, which you'll find incredibly
21 matches
Mail list logo
