Instead of monitoring Juniper equipment by SNMP with 5 minute polling we
would like to use streaming telemetry to monitor the devices in real-time.
This requires the Junos Telemetry Interface.
Looking in the Juniper Feature Explorer, Junos Telemetry Interface is not a
feature, but rater a whole
On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:20:00 +
Liam Farr wrote:
> However I am getting export packet failures.
Some loss of flows being exported may be unavoidable depending on
your configuration and environment. If you want to see fewer errors
you may just have to sample less frequently. The numbers
Thanks for all inputs.
Before the change I set the vlans that the peer was 1500Bytes MTU set on
the interface to avoid MTU issues, but I can try with some
of this transit providers the IP MTU on their side to match and check if
the convergence time will get better.
Regards!
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020
--- Begin Message ---
By any chance does you config/design include LSYS? If yes export could/will
have issues, BUT at same time this combination is not officially supported
together to start with. So if trying to use these together, you are on your
own.
On 9/Apr/20 10:55, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> Right, but there are bunch of techniques to address the FIB scaling problem
> of MPLS all the way to access layer (cell tower) deployments.
Agreed.
The goal is always to implement the least complex one (bearing in mind,
of course,
> Mark Tinka
> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 12:55 PM
>
> On 5/Apr/20 12:25, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
>
> > Nowadays however, in times of FRR (-well that one has u-loops), but
> > for instance ti-LFA or classical RSVP-TE Bypass... and BGP PIC "Core",
> > I'd say the SPF calculation
Seems I cant just drop the forwarding options into the vrf verbatim;
# show | compare
[edit]
- forwarding-options {
- sampling {
- sample-once;
- instance {
- default {
- input {
- rate 100;
- }
-
hey,
To be honest, we are on the old method and don't notice any badness. One
of those "If it ain't broke" times :-).
If you have your tables sized correctly then why would you notice
anything? They are the same tables after all.
I was just pointing out that if someone is distributing a
--- Begin Message ---
On 09-Apr-20 08:20, Liam Farr wrote:
Hi,
changed to a loopback address on one of the VRF's,
...
Not sure specifically what I am doing wrong here, it seems to be collecting
the flows ok, but exporting is the issue?
I'd appreciate any advice or pointers thanks :)
On 8/Apr/20 18:17, Tarko Tikan wrote:
>
>
> AFAIR no. You can verify via "show jnh 0 inline-services
> flow-table-info" from the PFE shell.
Okay.
To be honest, we are on the old method and don't notice any badness. One
of those "If it ain't broke" times :-).
Mark.
Hi,
I'm using the config example at
https://github.com/jtkristoff/junos/blob/master/flows.md (many thanks) with
a couple of exceptions.
However I am getting export packet failures.
Exceptions / changes from the example are the use of
*flex-flow-sizing* and *sampling
on the interface* rather
11 matches
Mail list logo
