[j-nsp] J-series RVI/IRB functionality

[Ross Vandegrift]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 09:55:13PM +0800, ?????? wrote:
> you need trun on enhanced switching mode in coresponding uPIM.

Yea, I have that - the config example you give is the EX-like version
of JUNOS's switching config (it works, and I like it better).

But, if the J-series don't support the MX-style config, then I guess
I'm not going to be able to develop MX automation against these boxes.

Ross



> 
> chassis:
> *********
> 
> fpc 5 {
>     pic 0 {
>         ethernet {
>             pic-mode enhanced-switching;
>         }
>     }
> }
> 
> interfaces:
> ************
> 
> ge-5/0/0 {
>     unit 0 {
>         family ethernet-switching {
>             port-mode access;
>             vlan {
>                 members VLAN899;
>             }
>         }
>     }
> }
> 
> 
> vlans
> 
> ******
> VLAN899 {
>     vlan-id 899;
> }
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:44 AM, Ross Vandegrift <ross at kallisti.us> wrote:
> 
> > Hey everyone,
> >
> > I'm working on developing JUNOS support for the existing features in
> > our automation software.  We are purchasing two MXes next quarter and
> > don't have lab MXes for me to develop against.
> >
> > Instead, I have setup a pair of J2360s with the GigE uPIM.  I was
> > hoping to develop exactly the same software that will one day talk to
> > the MXes.  Unfortunately, it seems that the layer 2 feature set of the
> > J and MX are very different.
> >
> > All of the documentation claims that the J-series support the
> > bridge-domains and family bridge style of layer 2 service [1].  But these
> > won't take any of that config - no bridge-domains, no family bridge.
> >
> > However, I can configure EX-style layer 2 config with family
> > ethernet-switching and vlans.  I kinda prefer this, but it looks like
> > my production MXes don't have this support.
> >
> > I'm running JUNOS 10.0 on these J-series boxes.  I've read some things
> > [2] that indicate the CLI is changing.  Is the EX- way of doing things
> > the way it's all going to go moving forward?  If so, this is a major
> > omission from the release notes - could break a lot of config.
> >
> > I mostly want to make sure I'm automating the right target. :)
> >
> > Ross
> >
> > [1] -
> > http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos-security/junos-security10.0/junos-security-swconfig-interfaces-and-routing/config-l2-bridging-transparent-mode-chapter.html
> >
> > [2] - http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nsp/juniper/19161
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ross Vandegrift
> > ross at kallisti.us
> >
> > "If the fight gets hot, the songs get hotter.  If the going gets tough,
> > the songs get tougher."
> >        --Woody Guthrie
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iEYEARECAAYFAksgDCEACgkQMlMoONfO+HCXPwCbBzuk1XuicemMsS4GiTaMB2/y
> > l0MAnRySnaE8/b/tFR2yllDkSybylS8d
> > =Oj7+
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> BR!
> 
> 
> 
>           James Chen

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
ross at kallisti.us

"If the fight gets hot, the songs get hotter.  If the going gets tough,
the songs get tougher."
	--Woody Guthrie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20091210/2fbdec72/attachment.bin>