[j-nsp] in-band management interface vs. re firewall concepts/bcp

[Clinton Work]

I would still use lo0.0 as your always up in-band mgmt interface.  
JunOS doesn't support putting management into a routing-instance and I
have been pushing Juniper for this.   You can use inet.0 for management
and additional logical routers for data traffic, but that is different
than a Cisco management VRF.   

JunOS doesn't have an explicit control-plane interface and you attach
your control-plane filter to lo0.0 instead.   

--
Clinton Work
Airdrie, AB

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> Hey there,
> 
> Coming from a Cisco background, I generally assign a loopback interface
> as my in-band management channel.  I stick that into my management VRF
> and that’s that.  Without knowing any better, my instinct would be to do
> the same in JunOS, but it seems as though lo0 is the control plane
> interface between user space and the re.  That feels somewhat different
> to me, because the Cisco equivalent is generally the control-plane
> “interface”.

> 
> So my question is what the best common practise is for an always-up,
> in-band management channel on JunOS in an exclusively L3 environment
> (i.e.:  no vlan or irb interfaces used at all in the system) without
> fully understanding whether that could also be lo0.0, or whether it
> should be lo0.somethingelse, or whether it should be something else
> entirely.