Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 virtual chassis and PoE
Hello Victor, I don't know if it's the case, but POE does not work on EX4200 with DC power supplies. Need to use AC power supplies instead. Regards. -Mensaje original- De: juniper-nsp En nombre de Victor Sudakov Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de febrero de 2019 8:19 Para: juniper-nsp Asunto: Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 virtual chassis and PoE Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 07:13:43PM +0700, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > Do I need to know anything special to configure PoE in a virtual > > chassis environment? For some reason PoE devices on ports ge-1/0/2 > > and ge-1/0/3 do not get power while the same device in port ge-0/0/2 > > does. All details below. > > Sounds like a bug. While I am not doing any PoE on any EX4200's, I > have a EX2200 stack with a POE version on the FPC 1 position. I've just tried another pair of identical EX4200s in a virtual-chassis, and PoE on the second FPC works fine. Seems like a hardware problem on the second chassis of the first pair. -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ ___ 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] Multicast duplicated on LAG with link-protection
Hello Chuck, Thank you for your answer. I didn't know about this option. Looking into the documentation, seems that this will do just what we need. We will test it with our customer. Thank you! Best regards. -Mensaje original- De: Chuck Anderson Enviado el: viernes, 17 de agosto de 2018 13:31 Para: Javier Valero CC: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Asunto: Re: [j-nsp] Multicast duplicated on LAG with link-protection Instead of LAG you can try RTG, redundant-trunk-group. That would block ingress and egress traffic on the backup link and not require STP. On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 11:20:24AM +, Javier Valero wrote: > Hello all, > > We are facing a problem with one customer and multicast video streams on a > link aggregation. > Maybe someone in the list know this behaviour and how to solve it. > > We have EX4550 (VC) switches on different sites. We transport our customer > traffic over all our sites with a SVLAN assigned for them (QinQ) and give > them multiple access points in different places. > In their service, they transmit some video streams with multicast, to all > their sites. (IPTV) > > In one place, we connect with the customer with two 10G ports, each one from > a different equipment in our side (geographically), for redundancy. > In their side it is only one equipment (also an EX4550). > > We cannot configure a link aggregation in our side, as they are different > equipments. MC-LAG is not supported by EX4550. > But our customer can configure a link aggregation in link-protection mode. By > this way, the avoid the use of STP for loop prevention. > In link-protection mode, the backup interface stays in standby mode, without > egress traffic, but allowing ingress traffic. > > The problem is the multicast traffic. As it is distributed over all the > links, we send the traffic on both 10G interfaces. > The problem is that the backup interface of the link-proteccion is also > accepting the multicast traffic, so in the customer equipment, they have the > multicast duplicated. > > This is causing problems on the customer side. > > We don't know if the LAG is a good solution for this case, or we should tell > our customer that use STP. > Maybe it is as simple as some configuration option that we don't know, or any > filter that can be applicated only on the interface not active. > > Someone have any idea how to solve this? > > Thank you very much in advance. > > Best regards. > Javier Valero. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Multicast duplicated on LAG with link-protection
Hello all, We are facing a problem with one customer and multicast video streams on a link aggregation. Maybe someone in the list know this behaviour and how to solve it. We have EX4550 (VC) switches on different sites. We transport our customer traffic over all our sites with a SVLAN assigned for them (QinQ) and give them multiple access points in different places. In their service, they transmit some video streams with multicast, to all their sites. (IPTV) In one place, we connect with the customer with two 10G ports, each one from a different equipment in our side (geographically), for redundancy. In their side it is only one equipment (also an EX4550). We cannot configure a link aggregation in our side, as they are different equipments. MC-LAG is not supported by EX4550. But our customer can configure a link aggregation in link-protection mode. By this way, the avoid the use of STP for loop prevention. In link-protection mode, the backup interface stays in standby mode, without egress traffic, but allowing ingress traffic. The problem is the multicast traffic. As it is distributed over all the links, we send the traffic on both 10G interfaces. The problem is that the backup interface of the link-proteccion is also accepting the multicast traffic, so in the customer equipment, they have the multicast duplicated. This is causing problems on the customer side. We don't know if the LAG is a good solution for this case, or we should tell our customer that use STP. Maybe it is as simple as some configuration option that we don't know, or any filter that can be applicated only on the interface not active. Someone have any idea how to solve this? Thank you very much in advance. Best regards. Javier Valero. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Experience with Junos 15.1 on MX960?
Hi, We had a bad experience with MX960 and 16.1R3. We were affected by multiple PRs. Some of them silent and "malicious" . However, we have a good experience with 15.1 on 4550 and 4200. Which problems did you found on it? Regards. Javier Valero | IslaLink / OranLink -Mensaje original- De: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] En nombre de Karl Gerhard Enviado el: martes, 12 de diciembre de 2017 10:53 Para: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Asunto: [j-nsp] Experience with Junos 15.1 on MX960? Hello we've had very bad experience with Junos 15.1 on our switches (EX4550, EX4300, EX4200). Now we're getting new MX960s with 2xRE-S-X6-64G and unfortunately the minimum required Junos version for this RE is 15.1. Can anyone share their experience with Junos 15.1 on MX960? Is it as bad as it is on the switches? Would it be wiser to jump directly to 16.1/16.2/17.1/17.2/17.3? We're especially interested in bugs/problems related to MC-LAG. Regards Karl ___ 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
