On 18 May 2018 at 09:37, wrote:
> So to clarify couple of things,
>
> First thing first,
> The "show cef exact-route" and "show mpls forwarding exact-route" is just a
> simulation, so it's not the real thing as I thought unfortunately.
>
> Secondly,
> One can use [
On 15 May 2018 at 10:20, Zsolt Hegyi wrote:
> In case you haven't read it yet, there is a free book called This Week: An
> Expert Packet Walkthrough on the MX Series 3D by David Roy, it has a bunch
> of examples on using jsim and other FPC/PFE commands, including what I
> [mailto:adamv0...@netconsultings.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 12:51 PM
> To: 'Saku Ytti'; 'Nikolas Geyer'
> Cc: 'juniper-nsp'
> Subject: RE: [j-nsp] "show ip cef exact-route"
>
> > Of Saku Ytti
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 12:32 AM
> >
&g
> Of Saku Ytti
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 12:32 AM
>
> Have you found cef exact-route to be correct?
>
> Last time I used this (ASR9000), it was giving wrong results to me. I think
> there is entirely separate piece of code for LAG result in software code and
> the CSCO EZChip microcode, and
> Of Nikolas Geyer
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 2:52 AM
>
> Someone at Juniper has kindly reached out and advised that a similar
> command was added in 17.1R1 for the MX;
>
> https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/reference/co
>
> ^ After running "jsim run" I receive lots of output that is going to
> take a long time to reverse engineer and work out what it all means. I
> haven't got the time right now so I was hoping JTAC would help but I
> guess I'll just have to work out it for myself.
In case you haven't read it yet,
On 15 May 2018 at 02:51, Nikolas Geyer wrote:
> Someone at Juniper has kindly reached out and advised that a similar command
> was added in 17.1R1 for the MX;
>
>
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 02:32:07AM +0300, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Have you found cef exact-route to be correct?
>
> Last time I used this (ASR9000), it was giving wrong results to me. I
> think there is entirely separate piece of code for LAG result in
> software code and the CSCO EZChip microcode,
Someone at Juniper has kindly reached out and advised that a similar command
was added in 17.1R1 for the MX;
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/reference/command-summary/show-forwarding-options-load-balance-ingress-interface.html
Sent from my iPhone
On 14 May 2018, at
The benefit of exact-route is it lets you input the 5 tuples to see what egress
link a packet will get hashed onto, which is useful when doing LACP bundles or
ECMP.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 14 May 2018, at 8:22 pm, Aaron Gould wrote:
>
> Cisco and iOS xr has been good for
The platforms I have used it on it has been correct, but that doesn’t include
ASR9k.
Scary to think what you have said could happen, but I guess I shouldn’t be
surprised.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 14 May 2018, at 7:32 pm, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> Have you found cef exact-route to
Have you found cef exact-route to be correct?
Last time I used this (ASR9000), it was giving wrong results to me. I
think there is entirely separate piece of code for LAG result in
software code and the CSCO EZChip microcode, and different people code
IOS-XR than ezchip, so I think there is
Unless it’s changed in newer releases there is no equivalent which is annoying.
I believe you can drop to the FPC vty and extract the information card by card
similar to the link you shared, but it’s not exactly a workable solution, nor
“officially supported” by Juniper.
The lack of this
13 matches
Mail list logo