Mailing List Archive: nsp: juniper

EX Routing Throughput

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

paul at paulstewart

Sep 29, 2009, 7:42 AM

Post #1 of 33 (2300 views)
Permalink

EX Routing Throughput

Hi there..

Does anyone have any real-world feedback on the layer3 performance of EX3200
and/or EX4200 switches? I've searched around and cannot find out the
capabilities (pps/Gbps) but new to the Juniper world ;)

Our needs are reasonable simple I think - considering putting in 10 EX4200
in a virtual chassis configuration using the Virtual Chassis Cabling. This
allows us ample copper ports on the front and we can use the 4X1GE or 2X10GE
ports for our fiber needs. Total layer3 throughput would probably be about
1Gb/s average and peak at 2Gb/s. OSPF, some small ACL, and IPv6 would be
used.

Thanks for any feedback,

Paul

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

jhanke at myclearwave

Sep 29, 2009, 11:59 AM

Post #2 of 33 (2249 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

The layer 3 throughputs listed should be any issue for the EX switches. You
will be limited to about 10k routes.

You'll need to be on the 4200 platform to do virtual chassis.

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
[mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:42 AM
To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

Hi there..

Does anyone have any real-world feedback on the layer3 performance of EX3200
and/or EX4200 switches? I've searched around and cannot find out the
capabilities (pps/Gbps) but new to the Juniper world ;)

Our needs are reasonable simple I think - considering putting in 10 EX4200
in a virtual chassis configuration using the Virtual Chassis Cabling. This
allows us ample copper ports on the front and we can use the 4X1GE or 2X10GE
ports for our fiber needs. Total layer3 throughput would probably be about
1Gb/s average and peak at 2Gb/s. OSPF, some small ACL, and IPv6 would be
used.

Thanks for any feedback,

Paul

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

sronan at fattoc

Sep 29, 2009, 5:58 PM

Post #3 of 33 (2244 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Did you mean should NOT be?

Shane

On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Jay Hanke wrote:

> The layer 3 throughputs listed should be any issue for the EX switches

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

christian at automatick

Sep 29, 2009, 8:40 PM

Post #4 of 33 (2244 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

yup

and also note on the 3200's redundant power supplies is available -
but the 2nd PS is external

around 100mpps for 48 port and 60'ish for the 24port - also utilizing
the 2x10GE ports will cost around 4 of the copper ports

and i believe the 4200 has a separate asic for the GE/SFP module (i
could be wrong though)

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Jay Hanke <jhanke [at] myclearwave> wrote:
> The layer 3 throughputs listed should be any issue for the EX switches. You
> will be limited to about 10k routes.
>
> You'll need to be on the 4200 platform to do virtual chassis.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:42 AM
> To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
> Subject: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput
>
> Hi there..
>
>
>
> Does anyone have any real-world feedback on the layer3 performance of EX3200
> and/or EX4200 switches? �I've searched around and cannot find out the
> capabilities (pps/Gbps) but new to the Juniper world ;)
>
>
>
> Our needs are reasonable simple I think - considering putting in 10 EX4200
> in a virtual chassis configuration using the Virtual Chassis Cabling. �This
> allows us ample copper ports on the front and we can use the 4X1GE or 2X10GE
> ports for our fiber needs. �Total layer3 throughput would probably be about
> 1Gb/s average and peak at 2Gb/s. �OSPF, some small ACL, and IPv6 would be
> used.
>
>
>
> Thanks for any feedback,
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

felix.schueren at hosteurope

Sep 29, 2009, 11:23 PM

Post #5 of 33 (2247 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

>
> and also note on the 3200's redundant power supplies is available -
> but the 2nd PS is external
I suppose it's best to just state that "redundant power is not available
for the 3200" - in my experience, the whole external power supply stuff
is causing more problems than it's solving.

>
> around 100mpps for 48 port and 60'ish for the 24port - also utilizing
> the 2x10GE ports will cost around 4 of the copper ports
the 10 GE ports have their own ASICs on both 3200 and 4200 platforms and
don't impact the performance of any copper ports, IIRC.

>
> and i believe the 4200 has a separate asic for the GE/SFP module (i
> could be wrong though)
>
that's correct - on the 3200 (as has been discussed on this list a
couple weeks back), using the optional 4-port GE SFP module will make
the last 4 copper ports dual personality (either copper OR fibre), the
4200 has no such limitation.

Kind regards,

Felix

--
Felix Sch�ren
Head of Network

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Host Europe GmbH - http://www.hosteurope.de
Welserstra�e 14 - 51149 K�ln - Germany
Telefon: 0800 467 8387 - Fax: +49 180 5 66 3233 (*)
HRB 28495 Amtsgericht K�ln - USt-IdNr.: DE187370678
Gesch�ftsf�hrer:
Uwe Braun - Alex Collins - Mark Joseph - Patrick Pulverm�ller

(*) 0,14 EUR/Min. aus dem dt. Festnetz, Mobilfunkpreise ggf. abweichend
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

felix.schueren at hosteurope

Sep 29, 2009, 11:29 PM

Post #6 of 33 (2243 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Paul,
>
>
> Does anyone have any real-world feedback on the layer3 performance of EX3200
> and/or EX4200 switches? I've searched around and cannot find out the
> capabilities (pps/Gbps) but new to the Juniper world ;)
>
we've been running a couple of 2-member virtual chassis in production
for some time now, at ~2-4 Gbit/s, no performance problems.

> Our needs are reasonable simple I think - considering putting in 10 EX4200
> in a virtual chassis configuration using the Virtual Chassis Cabling. This
> allows us ample copper ports on the front and we can use the 4X1GE or 2X10GE
> ports for our fiber needs. Total layer3 throughput would probably be about
> 1Gb/s average and peak at 2Gb/s. OSPF, some small ACL, and IPv6 would be
> used.
>
that should be no problem - although ipv6 support is still very fresh on
the box, but you should use the latest 9.5 for many reasons anyway.

How many IPs were you planning on terminating with the box? ARP scaling
can be a problem, you will definitively want to raise the default arp
timers.

Kind regards,

Felix

--
Felix Sch�ren
Head of Network

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Host Europe GmbH - http://www.hosteurope.de
Welserstra�e 14 - 51149 K�ln - Germany
Telefon: 0800 467 8387 - Fax: +49 180 5 66 3233 (*)
HRB 28495 Amtsgericht K�ln - USt-IdNr.: DE187370678
Gesch�ftsf�hrer:
Uwe Braun - Alex Collins - Mark Joseph - Patrick Pulverm�ller

(*) 0,14 EUR/Min. aus dem dt. Festnetz, Mobilfunkpreise ggf. abweichend
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

jhanke at myclearwave

Sep 30, 2009, 6:24 AM

Post #7 of 33 (2238 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Yep, should NOT be.

-----Original Message-----
From: Shane Ronan [mailto:sronan [at] fattoc]
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:58 PM
To: Jay Hanke
Cc: 'Paul Stewart'; juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

Did you mean should NOT be?

Shane

On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Jay Hanke wrote:

> The layer 3 throughputs listed should be any issue for the EX switches

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

tore at linpro

Oct 2, 2009, 5:45 AM

Post #8 of 33 (2225 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

* Paul Stewart

> Our needs are reasonable simple I think - considering putting in 10
> EX4200 in a virtual chassis configuration using the Virtual Chassis
> Cabling. This allows us ample copper ports on the front and we can
> use the 4X1GE or 2X10GE ports for our fiber needs. Total layer3
> throughput would probably be about 1Gb/s average and peak at 2Gb/s.
> OSPF, some small ACL, and IPv6 would be used.

Your throughput requirements are quite modest - you won't have any problems.

The first forwarding performance limitation I believe that one could
realistically run into is the available bandwith between the ASICs - if
I recall correctly, each 48-port EX4200 has three: one that handles
port 0-23, one for ports 24-47, and one for the uplink module. They are
daisy-chained with 8x PCIe interconnects so the bandwith between them
are limited to 32 Gbps (full duplex).

Use of the VC ports on the back simply continues the chain. If you have
a stand-alone switch, on the other hand, you should preferably loop them
back so that traffic from the uplink module to ports 0-23 do not have to
transit the ASIC handling ports 24-47.

One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will need
to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
included in the base image).

Best regards,
--
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Tel: +47 21 54 41 27
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

df at webkom

Oct 3, 2009, 8:24 AM

Post #9 of 33 (2215 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

> One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will need
> to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
> included in the base image).

I heard rumors that the IPv6 stuff will be free in later release of
JUNOS... at least for M/T stuff... so logically I hope EX stuff follows
that lead...

Patrik
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

gross at laxin

Oct 3, 2009, 9:05 AM

Post #10 of 33 (2215 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Hi,

Patrik Olsson schrieb:
>> One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will need
>> to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
>> included in the base image).
>
> I heard rumors that the IPv6 stuff will be free in later release of
> JUNOS... at least for M/T stuff... so logically I hope EX stuff follows
> that lead...

some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me, that
you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series. So
I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.

I hope Juniper will rethink this strategy. We would love to use our
ex-series switches to deploy IPv6 to our customers, but this step
would almost double the costs for each switch.

I played a little bit in our lab and got a message that an additional
license is needed when I actiated ospf v2. When I did the same stuff
(added IPv6 addresses and configured route advertisement)
with static routes, no warning appeared. I asked our sales, if this
means that no license is required but he negated that.

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Ralph.Smit at nxs

Oct 3, 2009, 9:58 AM

Post #11 of 33 (2215 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On 3 okt 2009, at 18:50, "Markus Groß" <gross [at] laxin> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Patrik Olsson schrieb:
>>> One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will
>>> need
>>> to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
>>> included in the base image).
>>
>> I heard rumors that the IPv6 stuff will be free in later release of
>> JUNOS... at least for M/T stuff... so logically I hope EX stuff
>> follows
>> that lead...
>
> some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me,
> that
> you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series.
> So
> I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.
>
> I hope Juniper will rethink this strategy. We would love to use our
> ex-series switches to deploy IPv6 to our customers, but this step
> would almost double the costs for each switch.
>
> I played a little bit in our lab and got a message that an additional
> license is needed when I actiated ospf v2. When I did the same stuff
> (added IPv6 addresses and configured route advertisement)
> with static routes, no warning appeared. I asked our sales, if this
> means that no license is required but he negated that.
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

cordmacleod at gmail

Oct 3, 2009, 4:00 PM

Post #12 of 33 (2215 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Oct 3, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Markus Gro� wrote:
>
> some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me,
> that
> you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series.
> So
> I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.
>
> I hope Juniper will rethink this strategy. We would love to use our
> ex-series switches to deploy IPv6 to our customers, but this step
> would almost double the costs for each switch.
>
> I played a little bit in our lab and got a message that an additional
> license is needed when I actiated ospf v2. When I did the same stuff
> (added IPv6 addresses and configured route advertisement)
> with static routes, no warning appeared. I asked our sales, if this
> means that no license is required but he negated that.

I have ex4200's in several 6-10 switch virtual chassis rings. They
are running ISIS/BGP up to M series routes and BGP to my anycast
machines. After 9.3R3, the code has been pretty stable. As of 9.3R4,
I've had no issues at all. The throughput as stated previous seems to
be 32Gb/s full duplex between the ASICs, although Juniper claims 128Gb/
s through the virtual chassis links.

Anyway, as far as IPv6....

{master:0}
xxx [at] xx> show system license
License usage:
Licenses Licenses Licenses
Expiry
Feature name used installed needed
bgp 1 1 0
permanent
isis 1 1 0
permanent
ospf3 0 1 0
permanent
ripng 0 1 0
permanent

Licenses installed:
License identifier: xxx
License version: 2
Valid for device: xxx
Features:
hurricane-routing - Licensed routing protocols in hurricane
permanent

License identifier: xxx
License version: 2
Valid for device: xxx
Features:
hurricane-routing - Licensed routing protocols in hurricane
permanent

In short, licenses are needed for those protocols. Also note, in a
virtual chassis being that there are 2 routing engines, you'll need 2
licenses per virtual chassis regardless of size.

Now one thing I feel compelled to add, because I ran into it the other
day, is that the ex DOES have IPv6 firewall filter support, although
it seems hidden.

xxx [at] xx# edit firewall family inet?
Possible completions:
> inet Protocol family IPv4 for firewall filter
{master:0}[edit]

xxx [at] xx# edit firewall family inet6 ?
Possible completions:
<[Enter]> Execute this command
> filter Define an IPv6 firewall filter
> service-filter One or more IPv6 service filters
| Pipe through a command
{master:0}[edit]

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Ralph.Smit at nxs

Oct 4, 2009, 2:41 AM

Post #13 of 33 (2191 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Hello,

First of all apologies for my previous empty post, what I meant to say was the following;
We're running a few EX-4200's in a VC, what I found is;
- IPv6 works fine, without needing a license, although you do not (yet) have features as vrrp, and firewalling (these features are not implemented yet afaik, their unavailability has nothing to do with a license)
- for OSPFv3 you will need a license.
- you'll also need a license for using the MPLS features.

Hope this helps.

Ralph Smit.

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Markus Gro�
Sent: zaterdag 3 oktober 2009 18:05
To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

Hi,

Patrik Olsson schrieb:
>> One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will need
>> to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
>> included in the base image).
>
> I heard rumors that the IPv6 stuff will be free in later release of
> JUNOS... at least for M/T stuff... so logically I hope EX stuff follows
> that lead...

some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me, that
you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series. So
I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.

I hope Juniper will rethink this strategy. We would love to use our
ex-series switches to deploy IPv6 to our customers, but this step
would almost double the costs for each switch.

I played a little bit in our lab and got a message that an additional
license is needed when I actiated ospf v2. When I did the same stuff
(added IPv6 addresses and configured route advertisement)
with static routes, no warning appeared. I asked our sales, if this
means that no license is required but he negated that.

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

df at webkom

Oct 7, 2009, 2:31 AM

Post #14 of 33 (2164 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Hello,

the license is honoured base I think. At least on M/T. It is enforced on
J series. EX is unclear to me...

Patrik

> Hi,
>
> Patrik Olsson schrieb:
>>> One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will need
>>> to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
>>> included in the base image).
>>
>> I heard rumors that the IPv6 stuff will be free in later release of
>> JUNOS... at least for M/T stuff... so logically I hope EX stuff follows
>> that lead...
>
> some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me, that
> you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series. So
> I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.
>
> I hope Juniper will rethink this strategy. We would love to use our
> ex-series switches to deploy IPv6 to our customers, but this step
> would almost double the costs for each switch.
>
> I played a little bit in our lab and got a message that an additional
> license is needed when I actiated ospf v2. When I did the same stuff
> (added IPv6 addresses and configured route advertisement)
> with static routes, no warning appeared. I asked our sales, if this
> means that no license is required but he negated that.
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Ralph.Smit at nxs

Oct 7, 2009, 3:32 AM

Post #15 of 33 (2169 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

EX is also not enforced. It generates an annoying message in the messages log, and raises an alarm, but it will work

Ralph.

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Patrik Olsson
Sent: woensdag 7 oktober 2009 11:31
To: Markus Gro�
Cc: juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

Hello,

the license is honoured base I think. At least on M/T. It is enforced on
J series. EX is unclear to me...

Patrik

> Hi,
>
> Patrik Olsson schrieb:
>>> One rather annoying thing you should be aware of is that you will need
>>> to purchase a separate license to run OSPFv3 (even though OSPFv2 is
>>> included in the base image).
>>
>> I heard rumors that the IPv6 stuff will be free in later release of
>> JUNOS... at least for M/T stuff... so logically I hope EX stuff follows
>> that lead...
>
> some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me, that
> you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series. So
> I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.
>
> I hope Juniper will rethink this strategy. We would love to use our
> ex-series switches to deploy IPv6 to our customers, but this step
> would almost double the costs for each switch.
>
> I played a little bit in our lab and got a message that an additional
> license is needed when I actiated ospf v2. When I did the same stuff
> (added IPv6 addresses and configured route advertisement)
> with static routes, no warning appeared. I asked our sales, if this
> means that no license is required but he negated that.
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

df at webkom

Oct 7, 2009, 5:08 AM

Post #16 of 33 (2168 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

> EX is also not enforced. It generates an annoying message in the messages log, and raises an alarm, but it will work

In J series it doesnt even work. So a warning message "only" feels good
anyhow :-)

Patrik
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

he at uninett

Oct 7, 2009, 1:32 PM

Post #17 of 33 (2165 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

> Now one thing I feel compelled to add, because I ran into it the other
> day, is that the ex DOES have IPv6 firewall filter support, although
> it seems hidden.

Yes, it's able to parse the config, but the config when applied
gets prepended with this comment block:

##
## Warning: configuration block ignored: unsupported platform (ex4200-24t)
##

So much for that.

Regards,

- H�vard
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

morrowc at ops-netman

Oct 7, 2009, 2:17 PM

Post #18 of 33 (2156 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Havard Eidnes wrote:

>> Now one thing I feel compelled to add, because I ran into it the other
>> day, is that the ex DOES have IPv6 firewall filter support, although
>> it seems hidden.
>
> Yes, it's able to parse the config, but the config when applied
> gets prepended with this comment block:
>
> ## Warning: configuration block ignored: unsupported platform (ex4200-24t)
> ##
>
> So much for that.

which is completely sensible since ipv6 has been 'production' for... 10
years now? weee!
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

cordmacleod at gmail

Oct 7, 2009, 2:22 PM

Post #19 of 33 (2156 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

Ouch, I didn't notice that bit. How unfortunate.

On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Chris Morrow wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Havard Eidnes wrote:
>
>>> Now one thing I feel compelled to add, because I ran into it the
>>> other
>>> day, is that the ex DOES have IPv6 firewall filter support, although
>>> it seems hidden.
>>
>> Yes, it's able to parse the config, but the config when applied
>> gets prepended with this comment block:
>>
>> ## Warning: configuration block ignored: unsupported platform
>> (ex4200-24t)
>> ##
>>
>> So much for that.
>
> which is completely sensible since ipv6 has been 'production' for...
> 10 years now? weee!

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

ras at e-gerbil

Oct 7, 2009, 6:30 PM

Post #20 of 33 (2165 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:17:55PM +0000, Chris Morrow wrote:
>
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Havard Eidnes wrote:
>
> >>Now one thing I feel compelled to add, because I ran into it the other
> >>day, is that the ex DOES have IPv6 firewall filter support, although
> >>it seems hidden.
> >
> >Yes, it's able to parse the config, but the config when applied
> >gets prepended with this comment block:
> >
> >## Warning: configuration block ignored: unsupported platform (ex4200-24t)
> >##
> >
> >So much for that.
>
> which is completely sensible since ipv6 has been 'production' for... 10
> years now? weee!

EX has a ton of missing features which are blocked like this. Which is
actually better than how it used to be, where they would commit and then
the box would crash and require a physical powercycle to recover.

The sad part is that IPv6 support (to say nothing of firewall support,
which is still extremely lacking on all fronts) isn't roadmapped until
2011 on "big EX". Why Juniper doesn't want this platform to have a
chance to succeed is beyond me, I guess they figure it's no fun if they
don't wait for the competition to catch up.

--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras [at] e-gerbil> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

morrowc at ops-netman

Oct 7, 2009, 6:42 PM

Post #21 of 33 (2155 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>
> EX has a ton of missing features which are blocked like this. Which is

yes

> actually better than how it used to be, where they would commit and then
> the box would crash and require a physical powercycle to recover.

wee... I guess? :(

> The sad part is that IPv6 support (to say nothing of firewall support,
> which is still extremely lacking on all fronts) isn't roadmapped until

check out snmp support as well, good times and spinlocked snmpd, weee! (
forget the order but something like snmpwalk the standard v2 accessible
mib tree and boom snmpd spins itself into the ceiling, until
9.5<something> code)

> 2011 on "big EX". Why Juniper doesn't want this platform to have a

'big ex' means?? 8XXX? isn't the idea with the EX you get a lower end
routing platform in the 32/4200 and can scale it up with VC's until you
want to grab an 8200?

> chance to succeed is beyond me, I guess they figure it's no fun if they
> don't wait for the competition to catch up.

smells like 6500...
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

paul at paulstewart

Oct 7, 2009, 7:01 PM

Post #22 of 33 (2162 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

We already have our answers on this - thank you. Didn't name the number of
routes because we knew that wouldn't be a problem in particular. Was
interested in throughput in particular....

We are moving forward on the EX series but purely for layer2 requirements
due to feedback.

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: wolfz [mailto:lobo [at] netadm]
Sent: October 7, 2009 10:00 PM
To: 'Jay Hanke'; 'Paul Stewart'; juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: RES: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

10k routes? 512k routes!!!

-----Mensagem original-----
De: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
[mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] Em nome de Jay Hanke
Enviada em: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:59 PM
Para: 'Paul Stewart'; juniper-nsp [at] puck
Assunto: Re: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

The layer 3 throughputs listed should be any issue for the EX switches. You
will be limited to about 10k routes.

You'll need to be on the 4200 platform to do virtual chassis.

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
[mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:42 AM
To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: [j-nsp] EX Routing Throughput

Hi there..

Does anyone have any real-world feedback on the layer3 performance of EX3200
and/or EX4200 switches? I've searched around and cannot find out the
capabilities (pps/Gbps) but new to the Juniper world ;)

Our needs are reasonable simple I think - considering putting in 10 EX4200
in a virtual chassis configuration using the Virtual Chassis Cabling. This
allows us ample copper ports on the front and we can use the 4X1GE or 2X10GE
ports for our fiber needs. Total layer3 throughput would probably be about
1Gb/s average and peak at 2Gb/s. OSPF, some small ACL, and IPv6 would be
used.

Thanks for any feedback,

Paul

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

ross at kallisti

Oct 8, 2009, 9:39 AM

Post #23 of 33 (2150 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 01:42:13AM +0000, Chris Morrow wrote:
> check out snmp support as well, good times and spinlocked snmpd, weee! (
> forget the order but something like snmpwalk the standard v2 accessible
> mib tree and boom snmpd spins itself into the ceiling, until
> 9.5<something> code)

Do you have any more information on this issue? Our VCs running 9.3R4
have begun displaying an oddly high CPU utilization, evidenced by SNMP
data collection timeouts - our graphs will sometimes have gaps of no
data for 2-10 contiguous five minute polling cycles. Sounds like we
could be seeing the issue you describe, though we didn't see it until
9.3R4.

--
Ross Vandegrift
ross [at] kallisti

"If the fight gets hot, the songs get hotter. If the going gets tough,
the songs get tougher."
--Woody Guthrie

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

cordmacleod at gmail

Oct 8, 2009, 11:03 AM

Post #24 of 33 (2139 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Oct 8, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Ross Vandegrift wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 01:42:13AM +0000, Chris Morrow wrote:
>> check out snmp support as well, good times and spinlocked snmpd,
>> weee! (
>> forget the order but something like snmpwalk the standard v2
>> accessible
>> mib tree and boom snmpd spins itself into the ceiling, until
>> 9.5<something> code)
>
> Do you have any more information on this issue? Our VCs running 9.3R4
> have begun displaying an oddly high CPU utilization, evidenced by SNMP
> data collection timeouts - our graphs will sometimes have gaps of no
> data for 2-10 contiguous five minute polling cycles. Sounds like we
> could be seeing the issue you describe, though we didn't see it until
> 9.3R4.

Ever since I upgraded to 9.3R4 I've been experiencing high CPU as
well. Jumped 30%.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

john at techvictim

Oct 8, 2009, 2:38 PM

Post #25 of 33 (2139 views)
Permalink

Re: EX Routing Throughput [In reply to]

On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 06:05:23PM +0200, Markus Gro? wrote:
> some weeks ago I asked our sales if there are any news. He told me, that
> you need a license for IPv6 for the ex- as well as for the m-series. So
> I assume the situation hasn't changed yet.

I had a chat with our Juniper rep this week and I was assured (much to my
surprise and delight!) that the IPv6 license is no longer required for M/T
series. However, disappointingly, v6 support on the EX series still requires
the extra license.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads