Err, I thought he had unlike-speeds for interfaces? > > Customer Interface 1 is a VLAN on a 10G interface > Customer Interface 2 is a VLAN on a 1G interface
Unless he does active-passive 1+1, but dunno if JunOS supports unlike physical interface speeds. plus means direct physical connection, instead of out an aggregated/VLAN'ed interface into his Layer-2 transport/switching/fan-out network. I suggested doing a firewall filter (non interface-specific) against the VLANs on egress, which calls a single (specific/dedicated) policer. May have to play with the knobs on the filter if it's on different PFEs. - Ck. On 08/04/2015, at 11:35 PM, Mark Tinka <[email protected]> wrote: >> Peter, >> >> Would an aggregate interface assist in this? If It can be done in your >> logical scheme, the aggregate interface would provide a simple way to apply >> the entire X bandwidth no matter the pipes up. > > Juniper do support aggregate application of a normal policer, where the > bandwidth is shared between all member links in the LAG. So yes, this is > a viable option. > > Of course, it means the customer needs to support LACP, but on the > bright side, you now only need one BGP session to the customer. The > limitation with this is that if the customer has more than one router, > it breaks the solution unless they can support MC-LAG. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
