For all those who were wondering about code stability for Trio cards, I
have my first experience to report. We just got our first shipment
of MPC2 cards, and tested it out in an MX960 running 10.2R1 with MPC2
cards only, no classic DPCs.
When I went to commit the config of the very first
On Tuesday 29 of June 2010 10:48:30 Thomas Eichhorn wrote:
Hi all,
I have a M5 which is currently rebooting almost exactly all 4 hours with
the following log:
Jun 29 08:39:45 r1 savecore: reboot after panic: ad_ioctl:1277800528: ad1:
Standby not armed but state is invalid: state=ARMED
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 04:05:55 pm Richard A Steenbergen
wrote:
So far things aren't looking good.
Very, very nasty, indeed. Hope you have JTAC running around
on this. Would be glad to hear what comes of it. Nasty,
indeed.
On my end, while away on tour, Juniper came back and took
back a
When you say 'transit session' what do you mean exactly? Also disappointed to
hear about the bugs.
Is the stuck-in-pending issue easily reproducible? I have read some of your
past posts, but recently it sounds like this can be reproduced without a lot
of effort?
All,
I have been trying to understand the P2MP LSP signalling and establishment.
I have few question about it:
How the ingress node knows about all the egress Node? BGP? Any good document
or link?
Now ingress node knows about the egress node then tunnel will be singaled
using the RSVP so there
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 11:43:49 pm David water wrote:
How the ingress node knows about all the egress Node?
BGP?
Yes, the MCAST-VPN address family ('inet-mvpn' in JUNOS)
signals the MVPN BGP NLRI either between peers or between
peers and route reflectors that support this AFI.
Now
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 12:41:21 am Walter Keen wrote:
Been working in a service provider environment, mostly
Cisco, almost finished with a CCIP. Want to get a
Juniper cert as well, but not sure which one is best
suited for service provider enviroments. perhaps the
JNCIA-M or
Mark,
Using those route types we can communicate about the source and destinations
in MVPN. Now as we know how to discover the source and receiver its time for
RSVP to take care of building the P2MP right? So RSVP does use the the BGP
discovered information to establish LSP, correct? So this way
Hi David,
Mark is absolutely correct, his example is specific to NG MVPN, although
technically you can also have
L3VPN P2MP, but yeah now best to move to NG MVPN if you can , and get the
benefits of a BGP based core.
Regarding Mark comments that most are using inclusive P-tunnels, we are
using
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:37:20AM -0700, Derick Winkworth wrote:
When you say 'transit session' what do you mean exactly?? Also
disappointed to hear about the bugs.?
Transit (n): An EBGP session where an external ASN sends you a full copy
of the global routing table, usually in exchange for
yep , I dont know wha's wrong but I keep agreeing with Mark today ;-)
I would start with JNCIA, because if you come from a Cisco background, there
are some chapter in the JNCIA that talk about the hardware architecture of
Juniper router (not in depth but it's good to know) , and cover somes junos
Yes, JNCIA is the usual starting point. The JNCIS takes many JNCIA
topics into more detail.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Mark Tinka mti...@globaltransit.net wrote:
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 12:41:21 am Walter Keen wrote:
Been working in a service provider environment, mostly
Cisco,
So basically, this stalled route issue has been going on for so long, that its
truthful to say that Juniper probably doesn't think its important to fix? or
they don't care?
I wonder what their official line is. Might be similar to their official line
with respect to the manufacturing issue
Hi there..
Some of you might get a chuckle out of this... Have a customer who called
and wants us to strip off their prepends they are padding in their BGP
session with us. They are padding their AS number 6 times and now the
traffic levels are getting too large with their other upstream
14 matches
Mail list logo
