Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

Stephen, Which RE is that on the MX480? The RE2000 or the quad core one? On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Stepan Kucherenko wrote: > Should've put it here in the first post, got already asked about it > offlist couple of times. > > I was testing it on MX80 with slow RE, so

Re: [j-nsp] Unwanted newline characters in Netconf XML

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:31 AM, Dave Bell wrote: > > On 2 December 2015 at 07:04, Tore Anderson wrote: > >> Works fine for me? Even in JUNOS versions as old as 11.4. Try: >> >> {master:1}[edit] >> tore@lab-ex4200# load merge terminal >> [Type ^D at a new line to

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper and Cisco - BGP MPLS L2VPN VPLS interoperability

Is it normal for a Route Reflector to reflect routes back to the client that send them in the first place ? I'm still trying to figure out why this ME3600 is resetting it's bgp session so I enabled some debugs and am wondering if something weird is happening here with this ME3600 and this

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper and Cisco - BGP MPLS L2VPN VPLS interoperability

(reformatting email with carriage returns between debug lines, hopefully that helps readability) Is it normal for a Route Reflector to reflect routes back to the client that send them in the first place ? I'm still trying to figure out why this ME3600 is resetting it's bgp session so I enabled

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

Some RE-S-1800X4, yeah. ASR9k has RSP440, so quad core x86 as well. Comparable I think. Not sure about 7600 but definitely something old. 02.12.2015 19:18, Colton Conor пишет: Stephen, Which RE is that on the MX480? The RE2000 or the quad core one? On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Stepan

[j-nsp] per flow rate-limiting on Juniper equipment

Hi, which Juniper products support per flow rate-limiting? I mean similar functionality to for example iptables "recent" module(http://www.netfilter.org/documentation/HOWTO/netfilter-extensions-HOWTO-3.html#ss3.16). For example following iptables rules build dynamic source IP list if new(not a

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

On 1/Dec/15 17:49, john doe wrote: > > > > Yeah, I was just referring to cli experience. commits, rollback, hierarchy > within. Prior XR IOS was wall of text, no? Still is, but you get used to working with what you have :-). Mark. ___ juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

On 1/Dec/15 18:43, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: > > I'd like to ask Mark and users of MX as peering routers (in a scaled > configuration) do you put every peer into separate group and you don't mind > or perceive any inefficiencies during BGP convergence resulting from many > update groups? > Or

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

On 1 December 2015 at 14:14, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 1/Dec/15 15:03, john doe wrote: > >> >> >> I think price wise MX is a better deal. ASR fully loaded with cards and >> licences for various services gets expensive fast. > > Depends what cards you are loading in there.

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

Should've put it here in the first post, got already asked about it offlist couple of times. I was testing it on MX80 with slow RE, so obviously numbers will change on faster REs but difference will still be there. ~1.5min taking full table from MX480 (nice RE, 85k updates) ~3min from 7600

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

On 1 December 2015 at 17:29, Stepan Kucherenko wrote: > My biggest gripe with ASR9k (or IOS XR in particular) is that Cisco stopped > grouping BGP prefixes in one update if they have same attributes so it's one > prefix per update now (or sometimes two). > > Transit ISP we

Re: [j-nsp] Unwanted newline characters in Netconf XML

On 2 December 2015 at 07:04, Tore Anderson wrote: > Works fine for me? Even in JUNOS versions as old as 11.4. Try: > > {master:1}[edit] > tore@lab-ex4200# load merge terminal > [Type ^D at a new line to end input] > /* This is a > * multi-line > * comment. > */ > protocols{} >

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

On 2 December 2015 at 09:17, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 1/Dec/15 17:49, john doe wrote: > >> >> >> >> Yeah, I was just referring to cli experience. commits, rollback, hierarchy >> within. Prior XR IOS was wall of text, no? > > Still is, but you get used to working with what

Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

On 2/Dec/15 11:44, James Bensley wrote: > With the exception of LAGs (IMO) as port-channels on the ASR1000 > series does not support QoS very well at all on them; > >