Hi,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Chris Kawchuk juniperd...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't want to make a giant vlan and put all the devices loopbacks in it,
one for
scalability issues but also for broadcast related issues.
Could you achieve what you want using RVIs rather than loopback
Well, part of good design is trying to avoid as many issues (whether likely
or unlikely) wherever reasonably possible, right?
Chris, thanks for the reply; thats what I was sort of leaning towards. I
still think even that is sort of an ugly solution, and like I mentioned in
my original email I
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Morgan McLean wrx...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, part of good design is trying to avoid as many issues (whether likely
or unlikely) wherever reasonably possible, right?
Sure.
There's also the KISS principle, and the assumption is the mother
of all ... screw-ups
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Dale Shaw dale.shaw+j-...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Chris Kawchuk juniperd...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't want to make a giant vlan and put all the devices loopbacks in it,
one for
scalability issues but also for broadcast related issues.
The bigger issue is that like Chris mentioned, I don't have the visibility
into my topology like I would with IP'd interfaces. Like I said, wherever
reasonably possible. I think this is a reasonable problem to spend some time
solving.
Morgan
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Dale Shaw
On 2011-08-31, at 4:12 PM, Morgan McLean wrote:
Well, part of good design is trying to avoid as many issues (whether likely
or unlikely) wherever reasonably possible, right?
Chris, thanks for the reply; thats what I was sort of leaning towards. I
still think even that is sort of an ugly
Chris,
Could you elaborate on:
Just need to be careful to bridge the VLAN across the trunk link as
necessary. (i.e. only bridge what you need - switch to switch - don't use
'vlan members all').
What would be the problem if I did all? I might have say tag 2001 going to a
switch that doesn't play
Chris,
Could you elaborate on:
Just need to be careful to bridge the VLAN across the trunk link as
necessary. (i.e. only bridge what you need - switch to switch - don't use
'vlan members all').
What would be the problem if I did all? I might have say tag 2001 going to a
switch that
Thats sort of what I'm expecting. My core is two 8208's running in the same
L2 domain with a trunk between them, and they each connect down to a switch
per cabinet. So switch A cabinet 1 is connected to core-A and switch B in
cabinet 1 is connected to core-B. The machines run bonding and have a
Basically, what we do is what Chris described.
In our case, we have Layer 2-only devices in two places in
the network - core switching in the larger PoP's and egde
switching for aggregating supporting services, e.g., DNS,
mail, e.t.c.
For the core switches, we run an IP-aware VLAN and enable
So for example, if I have a meshed layer 2 network with switches and I would
like to be able to maintain device reachability using something like OSPF,
how would I go about doing this? Everything already had two connections to
its upstream etc, but they are in the form of trunks. Junos won't let
From: Morgan McLean wrx...@gmail.com
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Tue, August 30, 2011 9:55:02 PM
Subject: [j-nsp] Running OSPF to manage loopbacks, only have trunks
So for example, if I have a meshed layer 2 network with switches and I would
like to be able to maintain
Hi Morgan,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Morgan McLean wrx...@gmail.com wrote:
So for example, if I have a meshed layer 2 network with switches and I would
like to be able to maintain device reachability using something like OSPF,
how would I go about doing this? Everything already had two
I think that's precisely what he's trying to avoid. =)
What we did is to use RVIs (vlan.xxx), but had a series of VLANs (VLAN 2000,
2001, 2002, 2003 etc..) setup as point-to-point /30s between the EXes inside a
VLAN. Switch 1 to Switch 2 would be VLAN 2002. Switch 2 to Switch 3 would be
VLAN
14 matches
Mail list logo
