Hi all, I've been reviewing the release notes to determine if the ERX's SRPs require SODIMMs in pairs. Example: Can the SRP work with 1 512 Module installed or would it require 2 256 Meg modules to function.
Any definitive information or reference to this information would be much appreciated. Also if anyone can advise if there are specific requirements for the low profile SoDIMMs used on the SRP it would be greatly appreciated. Rocco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 12:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 Send juniper-nsp mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of juniper-nsp digest..." Today's Topics: 1. multicast active sources (Dario) 2. Re: multicast active sources (Tomasz Szewczyk) 3. Re: multicast active sources (John Kristoff) 4. Re: multicast active sources (Dario) 5. J6350's interface down/up (usacox) 6. Re: J6350's interface down/up (Sabri Berisha) 7. Re: J6350's interface down/up (usacox) 8. Re: J6350's interface down/up (Sabri Berisha) 9. Re: J6350's interface down/up (Brandon Bennett) 10. Re: J6350's interface down/up (Sabri Berisha) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:18:02 +0200 From: Dario <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [j-nsp] multicast active sources To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dear all, Does exist any way to obtain the number of multicast active sources via SNMP requests? Regards, Dario D. ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:23:34 +0200 From: Tomasz Szewczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] multicast active sources To: Dario <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hi Dario, If you need MSDP SA I'm using .1.3.6.1.3.92.1.1.3.0 (msdpNumSACacheEntries) Unfortunately I don't have idea if there are more detailed counters for PIM except those defined in PIM MIB 1.3.6.1.3.61.1 Regards Tomek Dario pisze: > Dear all, > > Does exist any way to obtain the number of multicast active sources via SNMP requests? > > Regards, > > Dario D. > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:40:31 -0500 From: John Kristoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] multicast active sources To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:18:02 +0200 Dario <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does exist any way to obtain the number of multicast active sources via SNMP requests? Dario, I wrote this awhile back. It's nothing fancy, but may be a start. I haven't tested it in some time so your mileage may vary. It attempts to spit out a handful of rudimentary mcast counts and state info. <http://aharp.ittns.northwestern.edu/software/mcastsum> John ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:26:47 +0200 From: Dario <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] multicast active sources To: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: John Kristoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" John Kristoff, Tomasz Szewczyk, Many thanks for your help, it seems to work. Regards, Dario D. El Lunes, 15 de Octubre de 2007 22:40, John Kristoff escribi?: > On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:18:02 +0200 > Dario <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Does exist any way to obtain the number of multicast active sources via SNMP requests? > > Dario, I wrote this awhile back. It's nothing fancy, but may be a > start. I haven't tested it in some time so your mileage may vary. > It attempts to spit out a handful of rudimentary mcast counts and > state info. > > <http://aharp.ittns.northwestern.edu/software/mcastsum> > > John > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > > ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:25:27 +0900 From: usacox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [j-nsp] J6350's interface down/up To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Hello, all I have a problem of J6350's two interfaces down/up. The each interfaces face to CISCO(Catalyst6500) and Force10. I assume this effect is Juniper's bug at auto-negotiation. Do Anyone experience this problem? Regards ---- ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:35:33 +0200 From: Sabri Berisha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J6350's interface down/up To: usacox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:25:27PM +0900, usacox wrote: Hi, > I have a problem of J6350's two interfaces down/up. > The each interfaces face to CISCO(Catalyst6500) and Force10. > > I assume this effect is Juniper's bug at auto-negotiation. Which bug are you referring to? Did you configure both ends to have the same settings? If it is GE, did you explicitly disable auto-negotiation? -- Sabri ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:51:22 +0900 From: usacox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J6350's interface down/up To: Sabri Berisha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Thank you for your reply. I configured same setting both interfaces with auto-negotiation. I am looking with no-autonegotiation configuration without its fellow after this problem. On Oct 16, 2007, at 10:35 PM, Sabri Berisha wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:25:27PM +0900, usacox wrote: > > Hi, > >> I have a problem of J6350's two interfaces down/up. >> The each interfaces face to CISCO(Catalyst6500) and Force10. >> >> I assume this effect is Juniper's bug at auto-negotiation. > > Which bug are you referring to? > > Did you configure both ends to have the same settings? If it is GE, > did > you explicitly disable auto-negotiation? > > -- > Sabri ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:59:32 +0200 From: Sabri Berisha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J6350's interface down/up To: usacox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:51:22PM +0900, usacox wrote: Hi, > Thank you for your reply. > > I configured same setting both interfaces with auto-negotiation. > > I am looking with no-autonegotiation configuration without its fellow > after this problem. Some devices implicitly disable auto-negotiation when you explicitly configure speed and duplex settings. For J-series interfaces, the Fast Ethernet PIMs automatically disable auto-negotiation if you configure both speed and duplex settings. The Gigabit Ethernet PIMs do not, if you want to disable auto-negotiation on GE you will have to do so under gigether-options. If you have a link where one end is doing auto-negotiation and the other is not, you will end up with the first end (the one doing auto-neg) in half-duplex. This is the specified default according to 802.3u. Thanks, -- Sabri ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:18:30 -0600 From: "Brandon Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J6350's interface down/up To: "Sabri Berisha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 When using 10 or 100. There is no such thing at 1000-half (at least defined in the standard). ~Brandon On 10/1/07, Sabri Berisha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:51:22PM +0900, usacox wrote: > > Hi, > > > Thank you for your reply. > > > > I configured same setting both interfaces with auto-negotiation. > > > > I am looking with no-autonegotiation configuration without its fellow > > after this problem. > > Some devices implicitly disable auto-negotiation when you explicitly > configure speed and duplex settings. For J-series interfaces, the Fast > Ethernet PIMs automatically disable auto-negotiation if you configure > both speed and duplex settings. The Gigabit Ethernet PIMs do not, if you > want to disable auto-negotiation on GE you will have to do so under > gigether-options. > > If you have a link where one end is doing auto-negotiation and the other > is not, you will end up with the first end (the one doing auto-neg) in > half-duplex. This is the specified default according to 802.3u. > > Thanks, > > -- > Sabri > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:27:07 +0200 From: Sabri Berisha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] J6350's interface down/up To: Brandon Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 09:18:30AM -0600, Brandon Bennett wrote: Hi, > When using 10 or 100. There is no such thing at 1000-half (at least > defined in the standard). That's, correct. However, the following config is valid: ge-0/0/3 { speed 100m; link-mode full-duplex; gigether-options { no-auto-negotiation; } unit 0 { family inet { address 10.0.3.2/24; } } } When linked to another ge interface, you get: ge-5/0/3 { unit 0 { family inet { address 10.0.3.1/24; } } } Autonegotiation information: Negotiation status: No-autonegotiation Link partner: Link mode: Half-duplex, Flow control: None, Remote fault: OK, Link partner Speed: 100 Mbps Thanks, -- Sabri ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp End of juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 ******************************************* -- BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS ------------------------------------------------------ Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 27748847) is spam: Spam: http://canit.directus.net/canit/b.php?c=s&i=27748847&m=b3b6454ae461 Not spam: http://canit.directus.net/canit/b.php?c=n&i=27748847&m=b3b6454ae461 Forget vote: http://canit.directus.net/canit/b.php?c=f&i=27748847&m=b3b6454ae461 ------------------------------------------------------ END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
