[j-nsp] EX4550 L2Circuit/VPN to MX80/lt Interface

[Eric Van Tol]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
>
> If you're trying to make a router out of something that
> looks like a switch, the Cisco ME3600X is hard to beat.
>

ME3600X is wonderful, but very expensive once you get the full feature
set.  We are waiting (rather impatiently at this point) for our first
ASR920 to arrive to test out.  This is supposed to be the replacement
for the ME3400, but with MPLS.  It fits us nicer than the ME3600X, as
the footprint is much smaller and there are various models for port
density.

>
> ALU have a good product, but hardware layout is still an
> issue for me in this space.

Odd - we tried to engage ALU and they said all their gear is layer-2
only.  They were supposed to come to our office for a meet-and-greet,
but never came.  This is the second time we've tried to engage them
with no success.  Guess they are not interested in our business.

> Juniper have continued to come short in this area. And no,
> the ACX doesn't cut it.

Agreed.  ACX is just not there.  It baffles me why Juniper has left
this market untapped.  The mid-range MX is just too expensive and too
big for our deployments and the lack of LSR functionality in the EX
won't work for us.

Now, to get back on topic:

OP - we have some L2circuits on LT interfaces, but not with an EX on
the other end.  Is there any way you can try this by hairpinning a
couple of GE ports on the MX80?  Also, what's the reason behind using
'l2vpn' instead of 'l2circuit'?  I see you are using private
addressing on your interface - is there any chance that there are
blanket filters applied to your interface using configuration groups
or perhaps a forwarding table filter to prevent 1918 space from
traversing your network?

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