Re: [j-nsp] BPDUs over EVPN?

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 be

Re: [j-nsp] BPDUs over EVPN?

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,

Re: [j-nsp] good study guide/material for jncis - SP/P

about the mx ( 2nd edition) With best regards Alexander Marhold Ex-Juniper instructor, 4*JNCIP, 3*JNCDS -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von mcbob 58 Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Mai 2019 08:02 An: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] good study guide/material for jncis - SP/P

Also the book "MPLS in the SDN era" is a good material for newer developments in and around MPLS ( incl. EVPN, convergence enhancements, LFA,...) Regards Alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Alexander Marhold [mailto:alexander.marh...@gmx.at] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Mai

Re: [j-nsp] Finding drops

As per the requestor original message, I read that the packets are not counted on INGRESS There is a diff between received packets and the receive counter Regards alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Saku Ytti

Re: [j-nsp] L3VPN/RR/PE on Same router

Yes, the PE should do next-hop-self, the RR should not do it Route reflector can also be EBGP-Border Router, General use of next-hop self can result in inefficient forwarding  use next-hop self only for EBGP learned routes policy-statement bgp-export { term ebgp { from

Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 virtual chassis problem, master going into linecard mode

Alexander Marhold Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. Juli 2018 09:52 An: 'Tobias Heister'; 'Victor Sudakov'; 'Pavel Lunin' Cc: 'juniper-nsp' Betreff: Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 virtual chassis problem, master going into linecard mode Hi According to the documentation there should be the following behavior

Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 virtual chassis problem, master going into linecard mode

Hi According to the documentation there should be the following behavior with split-detection enabled: In case of a complete split: If the Master-RE sees MORE THAN HALF of the devices it survives otherwise it disables that part of the cluster If the Backup-RE sees HALF of the devices the backup

Re: [j-nsp] router reflector clients and non-clients

>Instead you should not even connect RR1 and RR2 together >And treat RR infrastructure built from RR1s I their respective clusters as a >separate infrastructure to RR2s. >This is the proper way NO,NO,NO This was the proper way in 1995, but not actual as... (Unfortunately most BGP books have been

Re: [j-nsp] router reflector clients and non-clients

>3. Non-clients which are also RRs in the same cluster (from which you should reject updates based on the cluster-id attribute). NO, NO, NO this is the old way of doing redundant RRs Never do this as it can lead to missing routing updates if a client A is connected to RR-1 only and Client B

Re: [j-nsp] router reflector clients and non-clients

forward routes to some neighbors twice ( one direct one via RR) Regards alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Alexander Marhold Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2018 08:17 An: 'Victor Sudakov'; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [j-nsp] router reflector clients and non-clients

and the same time D can be the RR of A Regards Alexander Marhold -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Victor Sudakov Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2018 07:59 An: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Betreff: [j-nsp] router reflector

Re: [j-nsp] Experience with MX10003

Hi Regarding same chipset as mx960: RE yes x86 PFE a clear no NO it uses a "BRAND NEW" 3rd generation TRIO chipset with 400G throughput also built into the MX204 Grabbed info from a BDM document in PPT describing both new platforms Regards alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von:

Re: [j-nsp] Multicast through a switch

Turning off IGMP-snooping means that every MC will be sent out on all interfaces within the same vlan. ( like broadcast) Turning OFF is needed when you have a pure Layer2 Multicast environment und you cannot turn on any multicast Querier. or irb-interface with PIM enabled, or ( every vendor

Re: [j-nsp] Understanding limitations of various MX104 bundles

Hi ! IMHO Edward is right with his assumption: Those are the available licenses for the MX104 Upgrade license to activate 2x10GE P2&3 MX104 S-MX104-ADD-2X10GE Upgrade license to activate 2X10GE P0&1 MX104 S-MX104-UPG-2X10GE Upgrade license to activate 4X10GE

Re: [j-nsp] LDP VPLS - Multi-homing

Regarding EVPN testing Why not taking some vMXes in an VMware or KVM environment, or even vQFX10k All those are able to do EVPN L2 and L3 and with active/active multihoming I do it since more than a year using different vMX versions Regards Alexander Marhold -Ursprüngliche Nachricht

Re: [j-nsp] Many contributing routes

Yes, you are right the primary contributing route is the mathematically lowest 32-bit number of routes in that case "Show route x.x.x.x extensive" shows the primary contributing route at the end of the displayed output. Regards alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Aaron Gould

Re: [j-nsp] Many contributing routes

Alexander Marhold Consultant and Trainer -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Vincent Bernat Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 09:06 An: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Betreff: [j-nsp] Many contributing routes Hey! I am generating

Re: [j-nsp] layer 2 sp services

ut I do not know if already implemented, L2 all-active should work ( have not tested it on QFX now) Regards Alexander Marhold -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Aaron Gould Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. August 2017

Re: [j-nsp] vMX

Hi Yes ! By changing parameters in the boot/loader.conf you can change certain behavior vm_chassis_i2cid="21" for MX960, "33" for MX480, and "48" for MX240 vm_ore_present=“0” for a single RE; vm_ore_present=“1” for dual REs vm_instance=“0” for the the RE, the first FPC slot; vm_instance=“1” for

Re: [j-nsp] Very basic question about MPLS and RSVP's place in the design

Hi There is also some good Juniper information available on the Juniper site This Week: deploying MPLS DAY ONE: MPLS FOR ENTERPRISE ENGINEERS Or as book MPLS in the SDN era The first 2 are quite good for starters learning the mechanisms With best regards alexander -Ursprüngliche

[j-nsp] Next-Hop Verification for static route WITHOUT BFD

and solutions Alexander Marhold ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Any sort of EVPN Success with: vMX 16.x and QFX5100

Hi As far as I know the paper deals with EVPN over VXLAN And As far as I know the vMX 16.1 does NOT support EVPN over VXLAN ( at least that I was told by some Juniper SEs and by the PLM manager for EVPN) Regards Alexander INDC -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper vmx not able to find op and event script files

Any other ideas? thanks, Martin On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Alexander Marhold <alexander.marh...@gmx.at> wrote: > Hi ! > > Maybe it is not a good idea to name a file equal to a possible command. > > Ever tried renaming the file to abc ? > Second possibility is tha

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

etween indirect-nexhop and outer label (which is changed once core link fails). Regards On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Adam Vitkovsky <adam.vitkov...@gamma.co.uk> wrote: > Alexander Marhold [mailto:alexander.marh...@gmx.at] > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 6:50 PM > &

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

Hi folks To make the discussion clearer and comming back to the Juniper MX 104 implementation Here is a picture of 2 PEs on P and 2 peers (ISP1 and IX1) let´s assume we want to prefer routes from IX1 over ISP1 MX1 is EBGP (lpref 100) to ISP1 and IBGP to MX2 and MX3 MX2 is EBGP (lpref 110) to

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

Hi Chuck ! Followed with interest the problem and especially your solution and I have looked into the docu BUT: DOCU says: " Before you begin: Configure the device interfaces. Configure OSPF or any other IGP protocol. Configure MPLS and LDP. <--

[j-nsp] Which BOGON filter strategy you would recommend IPv4 and IPv6

Hi ! My customer is a bigger company with customers around the world, which recently connected directly to 4 upstream providers and 1 IX via MX router and BGP Now by searching the internet and googling I do not know which method to use to have up-to date BOGON filtering for IPv4 AND IPV6

[j-nsp] VRRP VIP route not accepted as contributing route to AGGREGATE

Hi Experts ! We want to have an aggregate only announced when the VRRP vip route is active on the local BGP speaker Show route proto local shows the route 1##.123.456.100/32 *[Local/0] 02:15:41 Local via ge-0/0/6.0 As the local router is the vrrp master ge-0/0/6.0up

Re: [j-nsp] Mixed vcf question

Hi James ! You wrote : "For example for the layer3 (max routes supported, etc) why not the one of the QFX5100 acting as routing engine (and spine)?" It would not help you at all if the routing engine can hold for example 300k routes and then only 100k can be downloaded to the forwarding

Re: [j-nsp] vMX for ESXi

Hi There is a separate forum for vMX http://forums.juniper.net/t5/vMX/bd-p/vMX so I would suggest to put questions and answers regarding the vMX product here. Regarding the mentioned problems on ESXi ( or VMware) there seems to be some discrepancies and I brought the vMX to run on VMware WS

Re: [j-nsp] vMX for ESXi

Hi ! Maybe you missed the VMX getting started guide http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/vmx15.1f4/information-products/pathway -pages/getting-started/vmx-gsg-vmware.html he describes in detail how to setup vMX on ESXi regards alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von:

Re: [j-nsp] NETCONF in Junos

Hi ! Yes, if you want to see how the request command looks like Then do a " show version brief | display xml rpc" Using XSLT or SLAX the language create and uses exatly that XML information. Regards Alexander -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: juniper-nsp

Re: [j-nsp] Could JUNOS OP Script support generate firewall filter term and added before original one?

Hi ! Here an example on doing such thing with BGP policies. I know it is a little bit different but it shows a way to do such inserting using slax https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos12.3/topics/example/junos-s cript-automation-commit-script-prepending-global-policy.html regards