Re: [j-nsp] MIC3-3D-1X100GE-CXP ports won't light up.

Simple - but did you turn on the laser? On Jan 29, 2019, at 4:16 PM, Dave Peters - Terabit Systems wrote: Hi all-- New to this particular MIC. I've got two Juniper MX480s running RE-S-1800x4s with 15.1R7.9 on SCBE2s with MPC3E cards, and I'm trying to use MIC3-3D-1X100GE-CXP with

Re: [j-nsp] Copper transcievers in QFX5100, EX4600 and ACX5048

Even different Juniper models have slightly diferent form factors. I have both 1GE and Tri-rate sfps from Juniper and they are different On Dec 5, 2017, at 11:49 AM, Aaron Gould wrote: We *carefully* tried copper sfp's above and below each other in ACX5048 and it's ok.

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 v MX104

Go with MX104 Form factor much better. nothing on the back, have option for second RE if desired, RE is slightly better, 2 more MIC slots, cost is generally less on 104 than 80, if using ay 10G then it for sure should be, and if I remember correct 104 is quieter, but have not played on 80 for

Re: [j-nsp] Topology failure on EX4200

VC can be configured on any optical port, not jsut the dedicated on the rear. On Jul 16, 2017, at 10:17 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote: Roger Wiklund wrote: >> There is a ring of EX4200 switches, please look at >> http://noc.sibptus.ru/jun1.png >> >> If MUX1 fails, the MSTP

Re: [j-nsp] EX4600 Vs QFX 5100 VS ACX 5048

The ACX has many more MPLS and CE features compared to the QFX. On Apr 29, 2016, at 11:35 AM, Colton Conor wrote: Besides port count and expansion modules, what is the main differences between these three Juniper switches (actually Juniper has the ACX under their router

Re: [j-nsp] MX80 vs MX40?

Same options are also available on MX104. MIC slots and SFP+ ports are enabled by license. Both platforms have same capabilities and are rated at 80G. The license does NOT affect this as some think. RE on MX104 is slightly better than MX80. Also the MX104 has redundant replaceable RE and the

Re: [j-nsp] MPC2E vs MPC2E NG

More memory and cpu for higher scale New mid range qos support lower cost My top differences Check with your Juiper team for the complete list On Oct 13, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: Hi folks, I’m wondering what is the actual difference between these

Re: [j-nsp] MX240 MX480 and MX960 Power Consumption

Components in the MX240/480 are all identical. The 480 just has physically larger chassis and 2 more power supplies. If these are in a controlled environment and do not require NEBS, ie temp will NOT exceed 40c, then use a recent version of code and use the new power knobs to get the most

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 Build

The RE-2000 and SCB have been announced EOL for next year. On Jul 22, 2015, at 8:24 AM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: I am considering buying a used MX480. It will have the following: 1x MX480-PREMIUM-AC - MX480 Base system with redundant RE-2000, SCB, and AC power 2x

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 Build

correct. On Jul 22, 2015, at 8:53 AM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: Eventhough the RE-2000 is going into EOL status, it is still faster and has more memory than the RE's in the MX80 or MX104 right? On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Jerry Jones jjo...@danrj.com wrote: The RE-2000

Re: [j-nsp] MX480 Build

MPX support inline flow on Trio. Not as flexible but possible. On Jul 22, 2015, at 8:51 AM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: We would be getting redundant (2) RE-2000's with redundant (2) standard SCB's. The configuration would be full BGP tables with 4 providers on 10G ports. The

Re: [j-nsp] Thoughts on MX80 v MX104 RE performance

Generally we use the MX80 numbers for the 104. Though the 104 is slightly better than an 80. On Apr 20, 2015, at 9:38 AM, Mike Williams mike.willi...@comodo.com wrote: Hey all, There was a discussion May last year about the MX104 and BGP performance. With the take away being that the MX104 RE

Re: [j-nsp] Refurbished

Should be able to handle the tables ok. The RE will not support 64 bit though. When 32 disappears is when you will have issues. As long as DPC are the only line cards should work well. I am reluctant to mix with MPC in a single chassis. On Oct 20, 2014, at 7:31 AM, Johan Borch

Re: [j-nsp] Limitations of MPLS support on EX4200

My favorite place to go and find out if a feature is available for any platform vs release is the feature explorer. It really does a nice quick job and produces a nice savable output http://pathfinder.juniper.net/feature-explorer/ On May 1, 2014, at 2:15 AM, Victor Sudakov v...@mpeks.tomsk.su

Re: [j-nsp] PoE for older Cisco IP Phones

If memory serves - which may be doubtful - those phones used a different wiring scheme so I would not think any Juniper switch would work. On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Robert Hass robh...@gmail.com wrote: I have some older pre-standard PoE IP Phones (it's NOT 802.1af) from Cisco: 7940 7912

Re: [j-nsp] MPLS-TP OAM

JUNOS has no TP specific features, all OAM is available dwdm systems normally use an osc for management On Dec 4, 2013, at 8:46 AM, Yham yhamee...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I am trying to read about mpls-tp oam features that look probably the key reason that lead service provider to deploy

Re: [j-nsp] SRX vs Checkpoint (4800)

No comparison with checkpoint. But Space is a framework. Yes you can purchase an appliance to run it on or just download the vm. In fact you can download the vm and play with for 30 days free. To manage SRX you would use Security Director, a component of Space. You can download and try it

Re: [j-nsp] SRX vs Checkpoint (4800)

with an SRX over those. I do hear good stuff about Checkpoint. On Nov 24, 2013, at 8:19 AM, Jerry Jones jjo...@danrj.com wrote: No comparison with checkpoint. But Space is a framework. Yes you can purchase an appliance to run it on or just download the vm. In fact you can download the vm and play

Re: [j-nsp] per-unit-scheduling, vlan shaping, MX480

Yes you need the Q flavor to do per clan or HQOS Whether you require an MPC1/2/etc depends on the interfaces you need An MPC1 will support up to 2 MIC with 20 afp, or 2 XFP, or one each. If you require higher bandwidth then look at the MPC2 I would also go with an MPC1E instead of an MPC1

Re: [j-nsp] m10 re-333 latest version of junos

Depends a lot of which flavor you have with what memory This RE came with either 246M or 768M of memory and an 80MB flash Note: For M-series, MX-series, and T-series routing platforms, the CompactFlash card memory requirement for JUNOS software Release 9.0 is 1 GB. For M7i and M10i routing

Re: [j-nsp] qfx3500

Yes you can deploy as standalone, and be ready for fabric later if desired. On Sep 3, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Robert Hass robh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I'm looking for 1U switch with minimum 48x10GE SFP+ and 2x40GE QSFP. I see than QFX3500 can do all what I need - can this switch work alone without

Re: [j-nsp] JUNOS CLI

From the JNCIA study guide When you examine the output closely, you might notice that some command options are pre- ceded with a character—either an angle bracket () or a plus sign (+). These characters, as well as their absence, carry a special meaning when you use the set command. The angle

Re: [j-nsp] EX-RPS configuration

Only gotcha I have heard of is to use the center slot for the first power supply. What specifically is it not doing? On Jul 4, 2013, at 9:04 AM, Nick Kritsky nick.krit...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, Is anyone here who has experience with EX-RPS - redundant power supply for EX switches? I'd

Re: [j-nsp] EX-RPS configuration

connected to RPS, I got following answer: error: No RPS connected (chassis-control) nick On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Jerry Jones jjo...@danrj.com wrote: Only gotcha I have heard of is to use the center slot for the first power supply. What specifically is it not doing? On Jul 4, 2013, at 9:04

Re: [j-nsp] Advice on a 100Gbps+ environment

On Jul 2, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Morgan McLean wrx...@gmail.com wrote: Any good aggregation switch suggestions? Juniper is doesn't provide good ports for $ in the switching realmcustomer balked at the cost for a four port 40G blade on a 9200. Might check out brocade.. If you want to remain

Re: [j-nsp] vlans

If memory serves it is more like 64k On May 3, 2013, at 6:47 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote: On 5/3/13 3:26 PM, John pp wrote: hey all, what is the max amt of vlans on an mx480 (4k?) some people have said 16k but i am unsure some clarification would be great it used to be 16k per

Re: [j-nsp] 1000BaseT SFP

I think you need to specifically use the tri-state SFPs for this to work SFP-1GE-FE-E-T SFP capable of support 10/100/1000 speeds On May 10, 2011, at 6:59 PM, Keith kwo...@citywest.ca wrote: Trying to connect GE copper SFP on MX to a 100meg port on a cisco switch, 3560 actually. ge-0/0/2 {

Re: [j-nsp] SRX1400 opinions

I believe the J replacement is/will be the SRX. The MX is a tremendous platform. On Apr 28, 2013, at 2:49 PM, James Howlett jim.howl...@outlook.com wrote: Hi Paul, Thank You very much for the clarification. I will have only one ASBR. As for redundancy I'll go with a single 1400 unit and add

Re: [j-nsp] SRX1400 opinions

Good, you cannot run UTM on the data center SRX at the moment, branch only. On Apr 27, 2013, at 12:55 PM, James Howlett jim.howl...@outlook.com wrote: Hello, Thank you for the heads-up Srx's have replication issues with large routing environments. Duplicating two full feeds to the redundant

Re: [j-nsp] out of the box

Some platforms such as the ACX do support pulling down their config over the net On Apr 12, 2013, at 4:27 PM, Jed Laundry jlaun...@jlaundry.com wrote: Hey, On the SRX you can use a USB drive with autoinstall.conf: http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=contentid=KB23882 On the other

Re: [j-nsp] ability to turn USB port on/off for MX routing engine?

Is there not a free SDK for developing on the RE? http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos12.2/topics/concept/sdk-applications-overview.html On Mar 20, 2013, at 10:16 AM, Daniel Roesen d...@cluenet.de wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 04:12:19PM +0400, Nick Kritsky wrote: This rises the

Re: [j-nsp] SCBE-MX XE XFP socket

It is for timing. On Jan 14, 2013, at 7:01 AM, Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com wrote: Hey All, Does anybody know what the XE XFP socket on the SCBE-MX for? I cannot find any documentation about it anywhere. It's on the end of the card next to the clock interface. -- Leigh

Re: [j-nsp] Number of logical interfaces for EX switches

Firewall Filter terms per system? I mean if I put several big prefix lists and apply an accept/drop actions on them will it be possible to have a total of a few thousand entries? Thanx in advance On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Jerry Jones jjo...@danrj.com wrote: Hi Emil

Re: [j-nsp] L4-L7 and SSL offload switch

Well sorta - if you have MX. http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/software/network-optimization-services/intelligent-traffic-load-balancing/#overview On Oct 24, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Jonathan Lassoff j...@thejof.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Frank Sweetser f...@wpi.edu

Re: [j-nsp] MX5 to MX80 virtual chassis feature

I have heard it is still quite aways out yet. I too wish they had it as it is the nonredundant platform so would be nice. On Oct 22, 2012, at 6:49 AM, Riccardo S dim0...@hotmail.com wrote: Does anybody knows if there is a chance to have soon available the virtual chassis feature on MX5 -

Re: [j-nsp] cable modem/dsl/ftth bandwidth limiting

Yes some do their limiting at the DSLAM or OLT. However, why transport traffic just to drop it? I generally use an MX as a BRAS and shape there. On Jun 19, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Chris Evans wrote: Question for you service provider folks. How do cable modems, dsl, ftth, etc limit bandwidth? I

Re: [j-nsp] JunOS 10.4R8.5 on MX5? Am I forced to run 11.4+?

I believe you have one of the fixed configuration boxes which are different than the fully modular boxes, those do have additional capabilities such as h-qos Would suspect diferent minimum codes based on that On Mar 22, 2012, at 12:16 AM, Timh Bergström wrote: Hi, I recently bought a MX5-T

Re: [j-nsp] Mounting MX80 at an angle

I would be careful the hot air exiting the rear is not sucked back in the front, if the front is higher. Checkout link for airflow description. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/requirements/mx5-mx10-mx40-mx80-cabinet-requirements.html On Feb 16,

Re: [j-nsp] RAD Data Mirici-155 SFP OC3 in MX?

I would be inerested if anyone has used these in an SRX also. On Feb 8, 2012, at 2:14 PM, Dave hartzell wrote: Hello, I have been trying to get a RAD Data Communications Mirici-155 SFP to work in an MX-series box. The Mirici-155 is an SFP-compatible OC-3 plug-able optic that looks and feels

Re: [j-nsp] MX5-T-DC vs MX80-5G-DC-B

The T version is copper only. The DC version is modular. On Nov 18, 2011, at 11:06 AM, Kevin Wormington wrote: I'm looking at the above two MX bundles and other than timing support on the MX5 they seem to have the same specs. Is there something that I'm missing? Does anyone on the list know

Re: [j-nsp] What does AS path attribute problem mean?

Looks like JUniper issued a note today on this. PSN-2011-09-380 On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Juniper GOWEX wrote: Hi Experts, The attributes problems have appearedagain: /Sep 19 20:46:43 router1.net LEV[2625]: bgp_path_attr_error: NOTIFICATION sent to 149.X.X.X (External AS XXX):

Re: [j-nsp] SRX Experiences - Was: JUNOS 10.4S6 for EX8200 - PR/676826

Mine here at home has been working well, with the internal ADSL2. Only initial issue I had were the dumb MTU and MSS defaults. Only time it gets rebooted is when I pull the wrong cord Now I need to fix DDNS. Had it working on 10.1, but 10.4 and 11.x break it again. On Sep 1, 2011, at