[j-nsp] What's the latest code you're running on a mx?

[Mark Tinka]

On Saturday 01 May 2010 07:56:32 pm Richard A Steenbergen 
wrote:

> Hrm odd, the first we saw it was in 9.6S5, didn't see it
>  in any previous version.

The box that spat the data I sent in my previous is (still) 
running JUNOS 9.3R2.8, so it's definitely been in there for 
a while.

Granted, although both our configurations are under the 
"[forwarding-options]" hierarchy, mine is in the 
"[forwarding-options family inet6 filter]" sub-directory. 
Not sure if that makes any difference. My guess is it's all 
related to IPv6.

>  Juniper said it was a cosmetic
>  issue...

Looks like it, since we don't see any impact to normal 
operations.

>  and the PR was fixed in 9.6R4, which doesn't sound
>  like it should be related to a 9.3 issue. But who knows.

Indeed.

I've chased problems like this (but admittedly, in IOS, not 
JUNOS - yet), where the next release claims to fix the 
issue, but it doesn't, and each subsequent release after 
that says "It has fixed the issue", and still hasn't.

Oh well...

> Until trio cards start getting deployed, there is pretty
>  much no reason why any sensible network would be running
>  10.x on an MX today.

Or any platform, for that matter, I say.

I have some MX80's coming in for testing - let's see how 
that goes.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20100502/14a8d10d/attachment.bin>