Once upon a time, John Kristoff said:
> I bet there is a generation of people on this list that never saw the
> cartoons Juniper ran in it's early days. There were probably some that
> weren't a dig at Cisco, but this was pretty representative as I recall.
I think I still have my deck of
Let’s be real... this is how to pick a new Junos version
https://fuckingjuniper.com/dice.gif
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 12:32 PM Tom Beecher wrote:
> Start with the highest code version supported on the hardware that has all
>
> the features you need.
>
> Subtract 2 from the major revision number.
Start with the highest code version supported on the hardware that has all
the features you need.
Subtract 2 from the major revision number.
Pick a .3 version of that major revision.
Work towards current from there depending on test results, security needs,
etc.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 10:47 AM
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 14:42:32 +
Colton Conor wrote:
> How do you plan which JUNOS version to deploy on your network? Do you stick
> to the KB21476 - JTAC Recommended Junos Software Versions or go a different
> route?
I've occasionally got some good advice from bigger operators who often
have
Agree with Rx-S and with reasonably conservative approach,
should be >= 3. In S1, S2 you will probably get PR fixes
affecting multiple previous releases but for a new R-specific PRs it
takes time to be discovered and fixes implemented, which usually takes
not less than 6 months. Also you may
Hi,
On 19.08.2020 16:42, Colton Conor wrote:
How do you plan which JUNOS version to deploy on your network? Do you stick
to the KB21476 - JTAC Recommended Junos Software Versions or go a different
route? Some of the JTAC recommended code seems to be very dated, but that
is probably by design
I'm not sure how long Arista can keep the single binary approach as they
expand their portfolio
and feature set. For example it makes very little sense to have full BNG
code on EX access switches, imge would be huge.
As for JTAC recommended release, it's a very generic recommendation not
taking
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 17:47, Colton Conor wrote:
> Just wondering if JUNOS will ever go to a unified code model like Arista
> does? The amount of PR's and bug issues in JUNOS seems overwhelming. Is
For the longest time Juniper pretended they had a single Junos,
because they didn't have a large
How do you plan which JUNOS version to deploy on your network? Do you stick
to the KB21476 - JTAC Recommended Junos Software Versions or go a different
route? Some of the JTAC recommended code seems to be very dated, but that
is probably by design for stability.
Hi,
I posted some working config last week in this ML (working for EX4600 and
therefore QFX5100 – but on 18.4R3).
> Le 19 août 2020 à 14:40, John Brown a écrit :
>
> Switch A is running 18.1R3.3
> Switch B is running 18.3R2.7
> Both are qfx5100-48s-6q.
>
> [...]
>
> I am trying to QinQ
Hi I've been trying to get what I think should be pretty simple config
working between two QFX's
Switch A is running 18.1R3.3
Switch B is running 18.3R2.7
Both are qfx5100-48s-6q.
Switch A
Customer 1 xe-0/0/1
Customer 2 xe-0/0/2
Switch B
Customer 1 xe-0/0/46
Customer 2
On 19/Aug/20 10:37, Antti Ristimäki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In fact inline IPv6 BFD is supported for other than link-local addresses
> starting from 18.1 IIRC. This doesn't help for IS-IS or OSPFv3, though, as
> those use link-local addresses for adjacencies.
>
> We do have IPv6 BFD enabled for
Hi Guys.
I still can't understand why Juniper is not integrating a "mapping" for the
alarm-OIDs. I know, there's no craftd on the MX204 but in the CLI it also shows
yellow/red alarms so the info is already available ...
Kind regards
Joerg
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp On
Maybe you can use an SNMP script as a workaround?
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/example/junos-script-automation-snmp-script-example.html
/Roger
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:32 PM Arzhel Younsi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Our rep opened ER-080949 last month.
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
>
Hi,
In fact inline IPv6 BFD is supported for other than link-local addresses
starting from 18.1 IIRC. This doesn't help for IS-IS or OSPFv3, though, as
those use link-local addresses for adjacencies.
We do have IPv6 BFD enabled for IS-IS but with very relaxed timers compared to
IPv4. Haven't
15 matches
Mail list logo
