Phil Mayers wrote: On 04/10/2012 06:17 AM, Doug Hanks wrote: > >> In the context of packet-mode, the family mpls is analogous to inet. This >> is correct. >> >> > Not sure I understand this. > > "analogous" implies what, here? That enabling packet-mode for MPLS > implicitly enables it for IPv4? >
Yep. Same for ISO. > > If that's the case, why is there also a "family inet" option? > Looks like first they meant to have different options for different families allowing to simultaneously have some in flow and some in packet mode. But it's already about… 4 years passed, I think, and it's still this way. Any family turned into packet mode turns the whole box. Sort of the same stuff as 'say per-packet mean per-flow' LB. There might be a difference for inet6 (I am not sure) since some version, in which the stateful processing for IPv6 was added. I just remember I needed to explicitly set the packet mode for it playing around something implied IPv6, otherwise it didn't work (or rather worked in flow-mode but I had no zones/policies). Must repeat, I'm not sure. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
