ivalent for us to the old "base".
>
> -Michael
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of
> > Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 7:51 AM
> > To: Saku Ytti ; Aaron Gould
> > Cc: Karl Gerhard ;
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 12:09:39PM -0400, Tom Beecher wrote:
> > Did I mention Arista is not spending valuable engineer time on all this
> > license shit, but on actually making great products?
>
> Oh they aren't?
>
>
>
> Did I mention Arista is not spending valuable engineer time on all this
> license shit, but on actually making great products?
>
Oh they aren't?
https://www.arista.com/en/support/product-documentation/eos-feature-licensing
Arista will almost certainly move towards a licensing model similar
On 10/26/23 16:10, Aaron Gould wrote:
After tshooting with JTAC yesterday, they've determined the built-in
FPC to be a problem. They are doing RMA.
Strange that when the 60-day trail license expired, I decided to
reboot to see what would happen. I rebooted "request system reboot
After tshooting with JTAC yesterday, they've determined the built-in FPC
to be a problem. They are doing RMA.
Strange that when the 60-day trail license expired, I decided to reboot
to see what would happen. I rebooted "request system reboot
both-routing-engines" and that's when the router
On 10/26/23 15:47, Saku Ytti wrote:
I urge everyone to give them the same message as I've given.
Any type of license, even timed license, after it expires will not
cause an outage. And enforcement would be 'call home' via 'http(s)'
proxy, which reports the license-use data to Juniper sales,
#1, sorry I opened up the Women in STEM discussion, was not meant to
The comment about licenses – agree 100% with what was stated.
“I'd suggest staying very close to our SE's for the desired outcome we
want for this development. As we have seen before, Juniper appear
reasonably open to
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 at 16:40, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp
wrote:
> I'd suggest staying very close to our SE's for the desired outcome we
> want for this development. As we have seen before, Juniper appear
> reasonably open to operator feedback, but we would need to give it to
> them to begin
So my SE came back to me a short while ago to say that at present,
routing protocols will not be disabled if an MX304 (or some future
box/code designed for the same authorization framework) does not have
the appropriate license installed.
He did add, however, that Juniper are considering
On 10/26/23 08:02, Saku Ytti wrote:
Even if you believe/think this, it is not in your best interest to
communicate anything like this, there is nothing you can win, and
significant downside potential.
As you can probably tell, I am not terribly politically correct :-). The
coddle culture
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 at 07:45, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp
wrote:
> While there are some women who enjoy engineering, and some men who enjoy
> nursing, most women don't enjoy engineering, and most men don't enjoy
> nursing. I think we would move much farther ahead if we accepted this,
> If you
On 10/25/23 21:02, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
I tried to get my daughter (now Sr at Uni) to look at this field. Her response
was, “I don’t want to do anything like what you do”
At the risk of derailing this thread, one item that is generally
programmed into an agenda of
it
Juniper Business Use Only
From: J Findley
Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:00 PM
To: Richard McGovern , Michael Hare
, Saku Ytti , Aaron1
Cc: juniper-nsp
Subject: RE: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
Great time to be a network engineer
Juniper
You should not need a license for MOST features to work, for example L3
Routing, EVPN, etc. It depend a little on the exact platform and
feature/function. MACSec is one where you “may” need a license to activate, to
test/etc. In general, currently licenses are not required for most features to
, October 25, 2023 at 2:29 PM
To: Richard McGovern , Michael Hare
, Saku Ytti , Aaron1
Cc: juniper-nsp
Subject: RE: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
We are trying to hire network engineers at Blue Mountain Networks and does
anybody know someone looking
On 25.10.2023 19:20, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
Crist, not quite 100% accurate. Perpetual License are permeant and last
forever, but with newer Flex License structure also require a SW Support
Contract. Subscription based licenses of course expire at end of the
subscription
sday, October 25, 2023 7:43 AM
> To: Aaron1 mailto:aar...@gvtc.com>>
> Cc: juniper-nsp
> mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
>
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 15:26, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp
> mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net&
Crist, not quite 100% accurate. Perpetual License are permeant and last
forever, but with newer Flex License structure also require a SW Support
Contract. Subscription based licenses of course expire at end of the
subscription date, but do include SW Support.
Trial and Demo licenses always
Hare
Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 12:53 PM
To: Richard McGovern , Saku Ytti , Aaron
Gould
Cc: Karl Gerhard , juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
Richard-
Sorry if this is off topic, but what's the use case
ase".
-Michael
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of
> Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 7:51 AM
> To: Saku Ytti ; Aaron Gould
> Cc: Karl Gerhard ; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
>
Saku's comment about SSL certs; never underestimate a human's ability
to fail.
-Michael
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of
> Saku Ytti via juniper-nsp
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 7:43 AM
> To: Aaron1
> Cc: juniper-nsp
> Subject: Re: [j-
22.2R3.15
On 10/25/2023 7:50 AM, Richard McGovern wrote:
Aaron, what version of Junos are you using on your MX304? This should
NOT happen and if it did/is, then I suggest you open a Case with JTAC.
Minimally your account team should be able to get you a temp license
to work-around this
On 10/25/23 16:00, Gert Doering wrote:
What is "high-touch edge" for you?
Most things we could come up with do work, with the notable exception
of MAC accounting (or inclusion of MAC addresses in sflow/ipfix) - but
here the ASR9000 is one of the few platforms on the market that can
actually
I think the key here is that the OP had evaluation licenses. Those are
timed and things stop working when they expire. Purchased license are
permanent and do not expire.
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 6:18 AM Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/25/23 14:42, Saku
From: Aaron1
Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 10:07 AM
To: Richard McGovern
Cc: Saku Ytti , Karl Gerhard ,
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net , beec...@beecher.cc
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
Thanks Richard… et al, I’ll have to go back to my
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 03:44:57PM +0200, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp wrote:
> > Did I mention Arista is not spending valuable engineer time on all this
> > license shit, but on actually making great products?
>
> What is the current experience of the code for IP/MPLS functions that go
>
Yes indeed having dhcp-relay by default trigger scale-l2tp -- a licensed
subscriber management feature -- is quite annoying.
"set forwarding-options dhcp-relay forward-only" will turn off that
licensing requirement. IIRC there were scalpel knobs to accomplish the
same, we opted for the hammer
On 10/25/23 15:36, Gert Doering via juniper-nsp wrote:
There goes another vendor...
Now, if the base price would have been *lowered* by the amount the
L3 features of a *MX router* cost extra now, this might have been an
option... but for my understanding, the base MX304 is already insanely
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 12:50:33PM +, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp
wrote:
> The introduction of newer (well now like 2 years old) Flex licensing
> all newly purchased MX (which would include ALL MX304s) support
> only L2 in the base (free) license. For any L3 (even static) you
>
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 03:12:29PM +0200, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp wrote:
> On 10/25/23 10:57, Sebastian Wiesinger via juniper-nsp wrote:
> > Yeah it depends. Our MX204 also needed licenses for subscriber
> > managment. Some options would produce a license warning and some other
> > stuff just
On 10/25/23 14:42, Saku Ytti via juniper-nsp wrote:
But we can reject licenses that expire in operation and cause an
outage. That I think is a very reasonable ask. I know that IOS XE for
example will do this, you run out of license and your box breaks. I
swapped out from CRS1k to ASR1k
On 10/25/23 10:57, Sebastian Wiesinger via juniper-nsp wrote:
Yeah it depends. Our MX204 also needed licenses for subscriber
managment. Some options would produce a license warning and some other
stuff just failed silently which was worse. Also noone at Juniper
seemed to know WHICH licenses
On 10/25/23 08:01, Saku Ytti via juniper-nsp wrote:
Juniper had assured me multiple times that they strategically have
decided to NEVER do this. That it's an actual decision they've
considered at the highest level, that they will not downgrade devices
in operation. I guess 'reboot' is not
Aaron, what version of Junos are you using on your MX304? This should NOT
happen and if it did/is, then I suggest you open a Case with JTAC. Minimally
your account team should be able to get you a temp license to work-around this
until resolved.
The introduction of newer (well now like 2 years
Am 25.10.2023 um 14:25 schrieb Aaron1:
Years ago I had to get a license to make my 10g interfaces work on my MX104
If we are going into the HW direction and not features. Yes, that is
correct MX104 had some Port based licensing.
There was also MX5 -> MX10 -> MX40 -> MX80
And some not so
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 15:26, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp
wrote:
> Years ago I had to get a license to make my 10g interfaces work on my MX104
I think we need to be careful in what we are saying.
We can't reject licences out right, that's not a fair ask and it won't happen.
But we can reject
Years ago I had to get a license to make my 10g interfaces work on my MX104
Aaron
> On Oct 25, 2023, at 5:03 AM, Tobias Heister via juniper-nsp
> wrote:
>
> Am 25.10.2023 um 11:57 schrieb Xavier Beaudouin via juniper-nsp:
>>> So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they
Am 25.10.2023 um 11:57 schrieb Xavier Beaudouin via juniper-nsp:
So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they have
always been enforced. Subscriber MGMT is one of these features.
Well I remember wanted to use dhcp server on a MX204 for a local lan used
only...
for local
Hello,
> So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they have
> always been enforced. Subscriber MGMT is one of these features.
Well I remember wanted to use dhcp server on a MX204 for a local lan used
only...
for local administrators... that required some license I didn't
Am 25.10.2023 um 08:01 schrieb Saku Ytti via juniper-nsp:
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 22:21, Aaron Gould via juniper-nsp
wrote:
My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no
* Karl Gerhard via juniper-nsp [2023-10-24 11:18]:
> On 18/10/2023 18:55, Tom Beecher via juniper-nsp wrote:
> > Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
> > just grump at you on commits.
> It depends. MACSEC on EX and QFX first had a license warning and a
> permanent
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 22:21, Aaron Gould via juniper-nsp
wrote:
> My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
> various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
> honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
> that Juniper is
>
> My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
> various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
> honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
> that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license. I
> need to
My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license. I
need to understand
On 18/10/2023 18:55, Tom Beecher via juniper-nsp wrote:
Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
just grump at you on commits.
It depends. MACSEC on EX and QFX first had a license warning and a permanent
minor alert when configured on these platforms. With Junos 18
To reiterate and add to my previous email…also, please realize I’m in my early
stages of learning about telemetry and Junos capabilities, so this is only what
little I’ve seen and understand about it thus far…
As a side note, the ACX7100-48L has been a challenge regarding telemetry as
well,
day, October 19, 2023 3:28 PM
To: Mark Tinka ; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router
my tab and spacebar auto-complete is working...22.2R3.15
{master}
me@mx304> show system information
Model: mx304
Family: junos
Junos: 22.2R3.15
Hostname: mx304
On 10/18/2023 11
my tab and spacebar auto-complete is working...22.2R3.15
{master}
me@mx304> show system information
Model: mx304
Family: junos
Junos: 22.2R3.15
Hostname: mx304
On 10/18/2023 11:11 PM, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp wrote:
On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:
Only complaint
On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:
Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
extensively discussed in a different thread.
I have an update on that...
Our request was granted, and Juniper are initially targeting to fix this
in Junos 24.1.
On 10/18/23 18:55, Tom Beecher wrote:
Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
just grump at you on commits.
Okay, so usual licensing enforcement.
Just curious why warnings about OSPF and LDP... this is what a router is
exactly for.
Mark.
If unlicensed, you even get a license warning for a static route.
We have a handful deployed, and being a trio based platform they perform as
expected.
Hot swapping LMIC support are being explored and of course would be
welcome.
Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems
Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
just grump at you on commits.
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:32 AM Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/18/23 15:47, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
> > Also, I get a license warning when
On 10/18/23 15:47, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp wrote:
Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a license
from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
Any details on what this license does, and if there is any operational
risk if you don't apply it?
Also saw this message too…
Error related to jflow-specific reporting rate
[edit services analytics]
'sensor my-sensor-21'
reporting-rate can't be less than 30sec for Inline Jflow Sensor on mx304!
error: configuration check-out failed
Aaron
> On Oct 18, 2023, at 8:48 AM, Aaron1 wrote:
>
I have an MX304 in the lab, evaluating it at the moment. Junos: 22.2R3.15
Telemetry is running and a little different than what I have on my MX960’s
Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a license
from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
Good morning
All good ?
Anyone already running MX304 as an edge, using ipfix, flowspec and telemetry
features on the same box ?
Any problems related with that ?
If so, what version of Junos are you using?
Thanks
Giuliano
WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
Copyright (c)
56 matches
Mail list logo
