[j-nsp] Juniper OAC Home Settings
Dear All, Hopefully you all are doing fine. One of our customer has a wearied requirement related to Juniper Odyssey Access Client that he don't want to use OAC at home wireless network and want to use Widows wireless settings to connect. If above is do able, knowing client does not have permission to change OAC settings. Can we force windows settings to take preference over OAC? -- Regards, Rehan Rafi ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Krt queue issues
Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net writes: As far as the fallback 'default' route, if you are purchasing transit from someone, you could consider a last-resort default pointed at them. You can exclude routes like 10/8 etc by routing these to discard + install on your devices. That only helps if the default gets installed first, though. If the default has to wait at boot in the krt-queue behind the 300k+ Internet-routes, I have not really gained anything... I suppose it is likely that a static default would be installed before the BGP sessions even come up. /Benny ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] GRES on EX-Virtual chassis
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Muruganandham M sedhuan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I am referring the following link. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.3/topics/task/configuration/virtual-chassis-gres-cli.html Is it mandatory to configure the mastership-priority to 255 to enable GRES on the VC ? IIRC, when you have a two switch EX4200 VC, it's mandatory to set the priority manually to 255 on both members, otherwise weird stuff might happen. I run a pair like this and it's been stable for more than a year now. Eugeniu ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Interop ISIS Cisco
Hi, we gonna do it sometime next weeks. With Regard Joe - Via Aiped On 03/10/2012, at 11:42 PTG, Jeff Aitken jait...@aitken.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:49:42PM +0800, EZ Joe wrote: We have problems with Juniper and cisco ISIS peering. When we reboot cisco box, isis peering cannot establish until we activate and deactivate the interface. Currently using 10.4 version. Any bugs that we need to watch out? It would be helpful if you could share the configs from the devices on either side of the link. Are you using any form of authentication? Graceful restart? Do the MTUs match? Have you captured any debug info, and what log messages do you see? --Jeff ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper OAC Home Settings
Hi Rehan, If my memory serves me right, this is a Windows restriction, where it will only allow one service to manage the wireless connections. I remember trying to get OAC working for the office, and Windows for home on both Windows XP Pro, and Windows 7, where I eventually just gave up, and used OAC for everything. I was actively switching between the 2 services at one point in this effort, but it did require local admin privileges on the laptop, and it was not something the average user would find simple. Given that this was over a year ago that i gave up the effort, i wouldnt be able to tell you off the top of my head what exactly i was doing, but it did involve accessing the Services under Administrative Tools in the Control Panel of Windows every time i wanted to switch between OAC and Windows. Hope that helps, Mike On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Rehan Rafi rrk@gmail.com wrote: Dear All, Hopefully you all are doing fine. One of our customer has a wearied requirement related to Juniper Odyssey Access Client that he don't want to use OAC at home wireless network and want to use Widows wireless settings to connect. If above is do able, knowing client does not have permission to change OAC settings. Can we force windows settings to take preference over OAC? -- Regards, Rehan Rafi ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] GRES on EX-Virtual chassis
I always configure my VC-EX switches all with priority 255. If they have different priorities you can't manually failover and as mentioned other weird stuff happens. Luca -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Eugeniu Patrascu Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012 3:46 AM To: Muruganandham M Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] GRES on EX-Virtual chassis On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Muruganandham M sedhuan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I am referring the following link. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.3/topics/task/configurat ion/virtual-chassis-gres-cli.html Is it mandatory to configure the mastership-priority to 255 to enable GRES on the VC ? IIRC, when you have a two switch EX4200 VC, it's mandatory to set the priority manually to 255 on both members, otherwise weird stuff might happen. I run a pair like this and it's been stable for more than a year now. Eugeniu ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] GRES on EX-Virtual chassis
Thanks all for your tips. When we have both nodes with the same priority 255, will there be any change in the mastership when both nodes powered off and powered on together? Further, is it mandatory to enable the no-split-detection in this case? Thanks. On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Luca Salvatore l...@ninefold.com wrote: I always configure my VC-EX switches all with priority 255. If they have different priorities you can't manually failover and as mentioned other weird stuff happens. Luca -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Eugeniu Patrascu Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012 3:46 AM To: Muruganandham M Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] GRES on EX-Virtual chassis On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Muruganandham M sedhuan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I am referring the following link. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.3/topics/task/configurat ion/virtual-chassis-gres-cli.html Is it mandatory to configure the mastership-priority to 255 to enable GRES on the VC ? IIRC, when you have a two switch EX4200 VC, it's mandatory to set the priority manually to 255 on both members, otherwise weird stuff might happen. I run a pair like this and it's been stable for more than a year now. Eugeniu ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp -- *Thanks* *Muruganandham M* ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] JUNIPER POLICER and CoS Shaping Rate
People, Some topics where questioned today about how to limit traffic for vlan subscribers using MX5 routers. The main question is related to system architecture related to the main gear (internal machine) to control and limiting packets. Using policers (input or output) or shaping-rate we have quite the same result: miscalculating or error. If we create a rule like the following: set class-of-service interfaces ge-0/0/1 unit 530 shaping-rate 20m The output traffic rates 19.2~ Mbps only (using MRTG and SNMP statistics and graphics). We ever needs to allocate more bandwidth for the subscriber like. set class-of-service interfaces ge-0/0/1 unit 530 shaping-rate 22m To get the correct result ... Using policers generate almost the same result for output traffic. Is this because of system architecture or this is a graphic's mistake ? The burst size limit influence this result ? It must be calculated using what kind of parameter ? For example (same physical interface, same MTU, etc): Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 10 - VLAN 10 - 30 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 20 - VLAN 20 - 50 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 30 - VLAN 30 - 150 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 30 - VLAN 30 - 4 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Does anyone has solved this problems ? Is it possible to get a correct parameter and points to a correct limit for the contracted bandwidth ? Thanks a lot, Giuliano ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] JUNIPER POLICER and CoS Shaping Rate
The math for burst rate is a little odd. However it seems to average at around 10% of the desired rate. The burstiness (for lack of a better word) provides for a better user experience rather than a hard policer. Will O'Brien On Oct 3, 2012, at 9:55 PM, GIULIANO (WZTECH) giuli...@wztech.com.br wrote: People, Some topics where questioned today about how to limit traffic for vlan subscribers using MX5 routers. The main question is related to system architecture related to the main gear (internal machine) to control and limiting packets. Using policers (input or output) or shaping-rate we have quite the same result: miscalculating or error. If we create a rule like the following: set class-of-service interfaces ge-0/0/1 unit 530 shaping-rate 20m The output traffic rates 19.2~ Mbps only (using MRTG and SNMP statistics and graphics). We ever needs to allocate more bandwidth for the subscriber like. set class-of-service interfaces ge-0/0/1 unit 530 shaping-rate 22m To get the correct result ... Using policers generate almost the same result for output traffic. Is this because of system architecture or this is a graphic's mistake ? The burst size limit influence this result ? It must be calculated using what kind of parameter ? For example (same physical interface, same MTU, etc): Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 10 - VLAN 10 - 30 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 20 - VLAN 20 - 50 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 30 - VLAN 30 - 150 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Interface ge-0/0/0 unit 30 - VLAN 30 - 4 Mbps What is the correct burst ? Does anyone has solved this problems ? Is it possible to get a correct parameter and points to a correct limit for the contracted bandwidth ? Thanks a lot, Giuliano ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
