[j-nsp] Logical Tunnels & IPv6

[Brian Fitzgerald]

Hi

We ran into this one as well - JunOS 9.3 on an MX480

We couldn't get the logical tunnel between logical systems to take an IPv6
address unless we used encapsulation frame-relay - no other appeared to
work.  Why this was our Juniper rep couldn't answer - just pointed us at the
frame-relay workaround.

Wasn't a big deal, except watch the MTU - frame-relay default MTU was around
4450 (don't exactly remember), so if you are using jumbo frames on any of
the Ethernet interfaces in the logical systems, you will want to set the
tunnel MTU accordingly to avoid fragmentation.

Brian


On 10-05-30 2:21 PM, "Mark Kamichoff" <prox at prolixium.com> wrote:

> Hi - 
> 
> I just ran into what looks like an interesting limitation with logical
> tunnels on JUNOS.  It seems that using logical tunnels with an
> encapsulation type of ethernet results in the inability to use IPv6 on
> such interfaces.
> 
> I tried the following on an MX240 running 9.5R1.8:
> 
> {master}[edit logical-systems]
> lab at mx240-lab01-re0# show r1 interfaces lt-2/0/10.0
> encapsulation ethernet;
> peer-unit 1;
> family inet {
>     address 10.0.4.5/30;
> }
> family inet6 {
>     address fec0:0:4:4::/64 {
>         eui-64;
>     }
> }
> 
> {master}[edit logical-systems]
> lab at mx240-lab01-re0# commit check
> [edit logical-systems r1 interfaces lt-2/0/10 unit 0]
>   'family'
>      family INET6 not allowed with this encapsulation
> error: configuration check-out failed
> 
> (yes, I know, those are deprecated site-local addresses -  this config
> is straight out of the ancient JNCIE study guide)
> 
> Just for kicks, I tried switching to encapsulation vlan, added a vlan-id
> to both sides, but JUNOS still complained about the inet6 family not
> being supported.
> 
> Am I hitting some limitation of the built-in tunnel PIC on the
> MX-series?  Or, maybe this is a code issue?  I can upgrade this box to
> anything if needed, since it's just used for lab testing.
> 
> Anyone else run into this?
> 
> - Mark