I'm setting up multiple routing-instances for multiple customers.
Routing-instance configuration uses the same interfaces in multiple places in
the routing-instance config; and I am looking for block substitution method. I
don't see groups as an effective way to minimize errors.
Suggestions
Model: qfx5100-96s-8q
Junos: 14.1X53-D42.3
user@qfx5100-96s# set forwarding-options cut-through ?
Possible completions:
<[Enter]>Execute this command
> accounting Configure accounting of traffic
> analyzer Analyzer options
+ apply-groups Groups from
On a production MX480, will a traffic impacting event occur when
enabling tunnel services on an MPC3E NG PQ & Flex Q FPC with
with 10X10GE SFPP? (SCB2 enhanced)
thanks
Brian Nelson
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Yes, I have these kits in production, without the back cable mgmt rail.
Work just fine. They are beefier than the pictures depict.
Brian Nelson
On 08/02/2018 10:08 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Have you used this 2 post rack rails with the QFX5100? It looks like this
> rail kit has a back
I have 2x QFX5100-96s for an L2 core in a VC. Primary function is
mitigating exuberant computer research traffic; I have some unique
firewalls on every interface uplink to an EX2200/4200. Twice a year we
also push 8.5Gbs for 180 minutes to image systems on an EX4200 stack; no
other traffic notices
With an MX480 running 15.1, can flow sampling be configured on an
aggregated interface?
All the examples I find are only applied to logical units of physical
interfaces. The documentation implies an ae interface is supported.
Since the aggregated interfaces use physical interfaces from mic/fpc
Port-foo is so archaic.
It's an interface, inf-x/x/x would be more germane.
Brian
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ola
Thoresen
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 3:59 AM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp]
(bugging me) Found it, release notes for 16.1R2
: ISSU is not supported from 15.1R releases to 16.1R releases, if ...
multiple sections with all sorts of hardware limitations for ISSU.
I'm waiting on 16.1 or will upgrade during a major outage window.
Brian
-Original Message-
From:
I put a policier on the upstream connection firewall of the sort
policer traceroute-limit {
if-exceeding {
bandwidth-limit 2k;
burst-size-limit 1500;
}
then discard;
}
You might want to tweak this some. I can't remember why I chose these
values.
This tends to take
Yep, holding at 14.1X53 for production QFX5100 also. These were sold as
east/west datacenter Layer 2 switches. If they can't figure out port
init and connection, I am wondering what purpose these switches are
supposed to serve.
Seeing the same connection issues in EX2300/4300 with 10Gb ports in
If Juniper provides a version which is stable for more that a few weeks
let me know. I've been chasing version upgrades for months now.
Brian Nelson
On 12/9/19 5:15 AM, William wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am in the process of getting our first stack of EX2300s ready for
> production, can anyone recommend
The upstream connection to my MX480 is changing equipment and IP address
ranges.
Routing with OSPF, are there any complications to configuring two IP
addresses on a P2P connection -- old connection and new?
To allow the upstream connection can be physically moved from one
equipment to another.
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 11:38 AM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] How to pick JUNOS Version
it will be a reminder of what happened when Juniper went from JUNOS 8, and a
bit of 9, to Junos 10 and
14 matches
Mail list logo
