Re: [j-nsp] ACX5448 & ACX710 - Update!

2020-07-29 Thread Shamen Snyder
Heads up on the ACX5448. There is a major LDP bug in the recommend code 19.3R2-S3. LDP hellos are punted to the RE In queue rx-unknown-mc instead of rxq-l3-nc-hi. A major shift in multicast on our network dropped LDP neighbors. The issue doesn’t happen in 20.2R1 if you find it’s stable (I haven’

Re: [j-nsp] ACX5448 & ACX710 - Update!

2020-07-29 Thread Shamen Snyder
The Juniper Bolan architecture is suppose to have an AC variant. Hardened (-40C to 65C), compact (445m x 221mm x 250mm) form factor – suitable for cabinets in pre-aggregation network layer • 2 Routing Engine slots, 1:1 redundant control and forwarding/switching plane • 320Gb/s and 2.4 Tb/s RP Var

Re: [j-nsp] qfx5100, not possible to add a scheduler-map to an interface

2020-03-26 Thread Shamen Snyder
Most QFXs (and the EX4600) use ETS style CoS and scheduling. Give this tech library document a read. I think it will answer your questions. https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/example/cos-hierarchical-port-scheduling-ets-configuring.html On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:50 AM nikla

Re: [j-nsp] ACX5448 & ACX710

2020-01-23 Thread Shamen Snyder
I have been following the ACX 710 for a while now. We have a use case in rural markets where we need a dense 10G hardened 1 RU box. Looks like a promising box, hope the price is right. If not we may have to jump to Cisco ASR920s 4 100/40G (can be channelized to 4x25G or 4x10G) interfaces, 24 1/10

Re: [j-nsp] Link establishment issues with 1Gbps SX/LX SFPs on QFX5110

2019-06-25 Thread Shamen Snyder
What version of code are you using? When I worked at Juniper I delt with a ISP that had this issue and I believe 17.3R3 did not have the issue at all. There was an issue with BCM and the Juniper code. You can manually force the port up in the BCM shell (not that is a viable long term solution). F

Re: [j-nsp] JNCIE-SP question

2017-12-11 Thread Shamen Snyder
I spent 2 hours a day reading and 8 hours of lab (sometimes more) on weekends for about a year and a half. All that time I put into it paid off as I passed on my first attempt. With that being said I paid out of pocket for everything and really didn't want to waste the money on a failed attempt.

Re: [j-nsp] traceroute in mpls vpn's not showing P hops

2017-08-25 Thread Shamen Snyder
I think there is a bug with logical tunnels with how it handles TTL. Try physical ports for your logical systems. On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Aaron Gould wrote: > This is crazy… I was shutting down some lt interfaces trying to see if I > could get traffic to follow that same path via where

Re: [j-nsp] traceroute in mpls vpn's not showing P hops

2017-08-24 Thread Shamen Snyder
Are you setting icmp-tunneling on all the routers? It be helpful to see your configuration. On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Aaron Gould wrote: > I removed all rsvp and label-switched-path configs for a moment… then with > only mpls l3vpn configs, I turned on the icmp-tunneling. Still don’t see

Re: [j-nsp] can i see bgp looped AS PATH prefixes on the receiving router

2017-06-16 Thread Shamen Snyder
I've only ever used the *loops* knob for hub and spoke VPNs. There may be some other use cases, but I'm not aware of them. On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Aaron Gould wrote: > Here’s what happened when I added “loops 1” …it seemed to just allow > those previously loop-detected prefixes, to no

Re: [j-nsp] can i see bgp looped AS PATH prefixes on the receiving router

2017-06-16 Thread Shamen Snyder
Originally you did need bgp keep all to see routes that failed as-path loop checks. I thought that changed in one of the version releases however, that doesn't appear to be the case. Its the same on eBGP and cBGP. You need keep all to see it. I did this from 12.1. r...@mpr0.rdu.lab# run show rou

Re: [j-nsp] can i see bgp looped AS PATH prefixes on the receiving router

2017-06-16 Thread Shamen Snyder
Looped as-path routes should show up as hidden. Do you have *bgp keep none * configured? On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Aaron Gould wrote: > Nothing hidden. > > > > > > [edit] > > r4@lab-mx104:r4# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.2.9 > > > > inet.0: 33 destinations, 33 routes (33 activ

[j-nsp] Service Provider Shaping vs Policing

2017-04-19 Thread Shamen Snyder
I'm curious as to what other Juniper service providers are doing for their internet customers. I assume most probably shape or police at the customer CPE or as close as they can to it. We are currently in a position where we terminate internet customers in the POP that we purchase bulk transit in

[j-nsp] Fwd: Ethernet OAM Issues

2014-09-04 Thread Shamen Snyder
Good morning, I’ve been trying to get Ethernet OAM CFM to work properly and the lo0 inet filter is causing the layer 2 protocol to stay stuck in the ‘start’ state. If I deactivate the lo0 filter and add the source IP to the trusted prefix list commit then activate the filter OAM stays up. If I

[j-nsp] Ethernet OAM Issues

2014-09-03 Thread Shamen Snyder
Good morning, I’ve been trying to get Ethernet OAM CFM to work properly and the lo0 inet filter is causing the layer 2 protocol to stay stuck in the ‘start’ state. If I deactivate the lo0 filter and add the source IP to the trusted prefix list commit then activate the filter OAM stays up. If I