[j-nsp] Re: ae0 (802.3ad/LACP) against GSR?

[Saku Ytti]

On (2005-01-27 16:21 +0200), Saku Ytti wrote:

> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos70/swconfig70-interfaces/html/interfaces-ethernet-config54.html#1014780
> 
>  This suggests that VLAN is required, is this true, if so why? Also as
> GSR does not support any signalling (not lacp or pagp) will GSR<->juniper
> aggregated ethernet work at all? And if not, would list happen to know
> if GSR Phase3 port-channel will support LACP?

Reason why I'm asking I'm seeing this:
%CLNS-5-ADJCHANGE: ISIS: djacency to JUNIPER (Port-channel1) Down,
neighbor forgot us

JUNIPER rpd[2644]: RPD_ISIS_ADJDOWN: IS-IS lost L2 adjacency to CISCO on
ae0.0, reason: Not Seenself.

Juniper has just 'gigether-options { 802.3ad ae0; }' on two physical
interfaces (IQ and !IQ). With 'aggregated-devices { ethernet { device-count
1; }'.

Cisco has only 'channel-group 1 on' in physical interfaces.


Cisco has 2xE2 GE. Juniper IQ+!IQ. I can get the IS-IS up by shutting down the
link facing Juniper IQ. Other way around (only IQ + 1 Cisco E2 GE) IS-IS
continues to flap.

Cisco is running 12.0(27)S4, Juniper is running 7.0R2.

I'm not running point-to-point IS-IS, if I enable point-to-point IS-IS
on both ends Juniper complains:
JUNIPER rpd[2644]: RPD_ISIS_ADJDOWN: IS-IS lost L2 adjacency to CISCO on
ae0.0, reason: LAN Hello on PTP Interface

Even with both links up, I can telnet from Cisco to Juniper.
-- 
  ++ytti