> Rob Foehl
> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2019 9:44 PM
>
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2019, Rob Foehl wrote:
>
> > Juniper is now telling me that this is occuring by design, but can't
> > point to any documentation or standards which support that, nor
> > explain why it suddenly changed post-upgrade.
On Fri, 18 Oct 2019, Rob Foehl wrote:
Juniper is now telling me that this is occuring by design, but can't point to
any documentation or standards which support that, nor explain why it
suddenly changed post-upgrade. I'm... not convinced.
Plot twist: the BPDUs in question turned out to be
On Fri, 18 Oct 2019, Gert Doering wrote:
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 01:37:21PM +0200, Daniel Verlouw wrote:
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:45 AM Gert Doering wrote:
If yes, is this something people do over EVPN?
as an extension to 'plain' EVPN, yes. It's called EVPN-VPWS, RFC 8214.
Basically EVPN
> Are there vendor implementations?
Yes, am running in production on MX, ASR9K and NCS5500. Interops
nicely too, for the most part.
Believe Arista and others have working implementations too.
--
Daniel.
___
juniper-nsp mailing list
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 01:37:21PM +0200, Daniel Verlouw wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:45 AM Gert Doering wrote:
> > If yes, is this something people do over EVPN?
>
> as an extension to 'plain' EVPN, yes. It's called EVPN-VPWS, RFC 8214.
> Basically EVPN without the MAC learning.
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:45 AM Gert Doering wrote:
> If yes, is this something people do over EVPN?
as an extension to 'plain' EVPN, yes. It's called EVPN-VPWS, RFC 8214.
Basically EVPN without the MAC learning.
--
Daniel.
___
juniper-nsp
> Gert Doering
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 10:45 AM
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:40:53AM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> > On 18/Oct/19 09:15, Gert Doering wrote:
> >
> > > I could see very special cases where it would be necessary, but that
> > > would need to be a non-default-enabled
On 18/Oct/19 11:44, Gert Doering wrote:
> If I understand "L2PT" right here, this is the classic "EoMPLS" (in
> Cisco language) or "CCC" thing, as in "transparently connecting exactly
> *two* ethernet ports together, over MPLS or L2TPv3 or ... transport"?
>
> If yes, is this something people do
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:40:53AM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On 18/Oct/19 09:15, Gert Doering wrote:
>
> > I could see very special cases where it would be necessary, but that
> > would need to be a non-default-enabled switch.
> L2PT would be a use-case, but as you state, not typically
On 18/Oct/19 09:15, Gert Doering wrote:
>
> I could see very special cases where it would be necessary, but that
> would need to be a non-default-enabled switch.
L2PT would be a use-case, but as you state, not typically standard.
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:22:01AM +0200, Alexander Marhold wrote:
> Vpls not Voldemort
Supposedly both are very undesirable, and if you had too much exposure
to either one, it's hard to free yourself :-)
gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
Vpls not Voldemort
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 18.10.2019 um 11:20 schrieb Alexander Marhold :
>
> Normally in layer 2 like Voldemort and evpn you need a separate
> layer-2-Control instance to activate layer 2 control protocols like SPT
> IMHO the mentioned behavior is a bug
>
>
Normally in layer 2 like Voldemort and evpn you need a separate layer-2-Control
instance to activate layer 2 control protocols like SPT
IMHO the mentioned behavior is a bug
Regards Alexander
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 18.10.2019 um 11:09 schrieb Rob Foehl :
>
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2019,
On Fri, 18 Oct 2019, Gert Doering wrote:
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 05:37:16PM -0400, Rob Foehl wrote:
Is EVPN expected to be forwarding BPDUs at all, intact or otherwise?
The way understand "how things are meant to be plugged together", you
should not see forwarded BPDUs - "containing layer2
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 05:37:16PM -0400, Rob Foehl wrote:
> Is EVPN expected to be forwarding BPDUs at all, intact or otherwise?
The way understand "how things are meant to be plugged together", you
should not see forwarded BPDUs - "containing layer2 madness to one
attachment site" is the
Seeing something "interesting" after an 18.1R3 to 18.4R1 upgrade on some
EVPN PEs: the 18.4 boxes are now emitting BPDUs toward the CE interfaces
containing pre-translation VLAN IDs from the CEs attached to remote PEs,
which as far as I can tell are originating from the remote CE.
Is EVPN
16 matches
Mail list logo
