Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
The original line I was looking for was vm_local_rpio=”1” /boot/loader.conf I believe VMX was pre-release at the stage I was thinking of and after release it was only distributed as the multi-VM setup so I'm not sure if the code that ran the virtual FPC integrated is still there. https://docs.gns3.com/docs/how-to-guides/importing-vmx-and-vqfx-into-gns3/ On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 19:54, Mark Tees wrote: > > Hello > > I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot > flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a > separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. > > Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low > performance/fake FPC ideally. > > Cheers > > Mark -- M Tees ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
Hi Lukasz. Went scavenging through documentation and the requirements are not bigger, they are actually less. Memory required is the same (3GB) but nested only requires 3 vCPU to run everything, versus the 4 vCPU required for non-nested. So negligible reduction, but it’s definitely not bigger requirements for a basic life mode instance. Cheers, Nik. Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 23, 2020, at 10:50 AM, Łukasz Bromirski wrote: > > Nikolas, Mark, > >> On 23 Dec 2020, at 02:47, Nikolas Geyer wrote: >> >> vRR is basically just the VCP component of vMX without the vFP, which is why >> it’s limited to Linux bridged “management” interfaces. >> >> There is nested vMX which runs the VCP as a nested virtual machine within >> the VFP, not sure if it reduces requirements and iirc it only works on KVM. > > VFP has very specific requirements w/r to cores and memory, it’s a superset > of VCP. So no, the requirements will be actually bigger: > https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/vmx/topics/reference/general/vmx-hw-sw-minimums.html > > -- > Łukasz Bromirski > CCIE R/SP #15929, CCDE #2012::17, PGP Key ID: 0xFD077F6A ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
On 21 Dec 2020, at 12:54 EAT, Mark Tees wrote: Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low performance/fake FPC ideally. In addition to the responses you’ve received there’s also https://github.com/Juniper/OpenJNPR-Container-vMX to look at. YMMV. -- patrick ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
Nikolas, Mark, > On 23 Dec 2020, at 02:47, Nikolas Geyer wrote: > > vRR is basically just the VCP component of vMX without the vFP, which is why > it’s limited to Linux bridged “management” interfaces. > > There is nested vMX which runs the VCP as a nested virtual machine within the > VFP, not sure if it reduces requirements and iirc it only works on KVM. VFP has very specific requirements w/r to cores and memory, it’s a superset of VCP. So no, the requirements will be actually bigger: https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/vmx/topics/reference/general/vmx-hw-sw-minimums.html -- Łukasz Bromirski CCIE R/SP #15929, CCDE #2012::17, PGP Key ID: 0xFD077F6A ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
vRR is basically just the VCP component of vMX without the vFP, which is why it’s limited to Linux bridged “management” interfaces. There is nested vMX which runs the VCP as a nested virtual machine within the VFP, not sure if it reduces requirements and iirc it only works on KVM. Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 21, 2020, at 6:43 PM, Mark Tees wrote: > > That's it. I actually wanted to see MX specific things get spun on up > on interfaces from some code being developed. > > Currently I have 2 x VMX's squashed into 4G's of RAM running under > Vmware Fusion which currently does the job but it's a bit messy. I can > probably fix the mess by generating the Vmware VM config files. > > I should inspect the VRR image to see what it's doing and if there is > anything that can be mimicked. > > The other thing is if I am happy with just seeing the changes being > loaded into control plane successfully I can just use a group but not > apply it. > >> On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 02:52, Saku Ytti wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 18:27, wrote: >>> >>> I guess if you don't want any vfp VM and want to run vcp VM only then vRR or >>> the cRDP are the possible options? >> >> I suspect the requirement is MX feature/configuration validation, so >> pps would be traded for simplicity of stack, down to 1pps. vRR and >> cRPD would not be an acceptable answer for this use-case. >> >> >> -- >> ++ytti > > > > -- > Regards, > > Mark Tees > ___ > 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] VMX integrated FPC
Digging into that a bit further, it looks like when I enabled the Intel VT-x/EPT on a Linux VM in Vmware it booted with /dev/kvm so it may work. Will give it a go and report back. On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 09:50, Mark Tees wrote: > > I would love to use that but it requires a CPU that has nested > virtualisation features which my laptop doesn't have. > > I have another machine with a newer Intel i7 CPU but I suspect VMCS is > Xeon only. I can always boot that second box into Linux and run KVM > directly on it though. > > Food for thought. > > On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 02:59, Sander Steffann wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot > > > flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a > > > separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. > > > > > > Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low > > > performance/fake FPC ideally. > > > > I think you're referring to the Nested VM Model: > > https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/vmx/topics/topic-map/vmx-nested-installing-on-kvm.html > > > > Cheers! > > Sander > > > > > -- > > M Tees -- M Tees ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
I would love to use that but it requires a CPU that has nested virtualisation features which my laptop doesn't have. I have another machine with a newer Intel i7 CPU but I suspect VMCS is Xeon only. I can always boot that second box into Linux and run KVM directly on it though. Food for thought. On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 02:59, Sander Steffann wrote: > > Hi, > > I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot > > flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a > > separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. > > > > Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low > > performance/fake FPC ideally. > > I think you're referring to the Nested VM Model: > https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/vmx/topics/topic-map/vmx-nested-installing-on-kvm.html > > Cheers! > Sander > -- M Tees ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
That's it. I actually wanted to see MX specific things get spun on up on interfaces from some code being developed. Currently I have 2 x VMX's squashed into 4G's of RAM running under Vmware Fusion which currently does the job but it's a bit messy. I can probably fix the mess by generating the Vmware VM config files. I should inspect the VRR image to see what it's doing and if there is anything that can be mimicked. The other thing is if I am happy with just seeing the changes being loaded into control plane successfully I can just use a group but not apply it. On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 02:52, Saku Ytti wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 18:27, wrote: > > > I guess if you don't want any vfp VM and want to run vcp VM only then vRR or > > the cRDP are the possible options? > > I suspect the requirement is MX feature/configuration validation, so > pps would be traded for simplicity of stack, down to 1pps. vRR and > cRPD would not be an acceptable answer for this use-case. > > > -- > ++ytti -- Regards, Mark Tees ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
Hi, I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot > flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a > separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. > > Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low > performance/fake FPC ideally. I think you're referring to the Nested VM Model: https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/vmx/topics/topic-map/vmx-nested-installing-on-kvm.html Cheers! Sander signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 18:27, wrote: > I guess if you don't want any vfp VM and want to run vcp VM only then vRR or > the cRDP are the possible options? I suspect the requirement is MX feature/configuration validation, so pps would be traded for simplicity of stack, down to 1pps. vRR and cRPD would not be an acceptable answer for this use-case. -- ++ytti ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
> James Bensley > Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:01 PM > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 09:56, Mark Tees wrote: > > > > Hello > > > > I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot > > flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a > > separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. > > > > Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low > > performance/fake FPC ideally. > > Hi Mark, > > Are you thinking of this? > > "set chassis fpc 0 lite-mode" - requires a reboot to take effect. > My understanding is that it just reduces the vfp VM demands for CPU/MEM rather than eliminating it completely? I guess if you don't want any vfp VM and want to run vcp VM only then vRR or the cRDP are the possible options? adam ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 09:56, Mark Tees wrote: > > Hello > > I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot > flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a > separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. > > Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low > performance/fake FPC ideally. Hi Mark, Are you thinking of this? "set chassis fpc 0 lite-mode" - requires a reboot to take effect. Cheers, James. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] VMX integrated FPC
Hello I remember when I originally got my mittens on VMX there was a boot flag to tell it to use an integrated FPC or integrated RIOT without a separate VM running forwarding. I can't find my notes on that. Does anyone know if that's still possible? I just want a pretend/low performance/fake FPC ideally. Cheers Mark ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
