[j-nsp] QFX5110 : Q-in-Q in VXLAN
raphael at zoreole.com
Mon Sep 10 15:40:43 EDT 2018
I was about to suggest this .
If you only need to do A to B, I will suggest doing pseudowire instead of Evpn transport.
But, you cannot end the pseudowire on a sub-if ( on MX you can ), on QFX, Interface are dedicated to one protocol
On 10/09/2018 21:37, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Olivier FRUQUET" <juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net on behalf of olivier.fruquet at gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for your answers, very bad news for me :(
There's no solution to make a transparent pseudowire with support of VLAN
tags with my hardware ?
Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 à 21:32, Raphael Mazelier <raph at futomaki.net> a
> On 10/09/2018 21:22, Raphael Maunier wrote:
> > There is some limitation on the qfx due to the Broadcom chip. On the
> 10k, you don’t have all the limitations to the cheap chip ^^
> > On the 5100 you have a lot of limitation on the 5110, you have less, but
> not sure it support the double tag encapsulated frames (Broadcom)
> > I have a bunch of evpn infrastructure deployed, but I never tried to use
> q-in-q, so not sure if 5k will support this.
> > I have 10k’s in the lab I may be able to test it
> Got the same problem type of problem on EX5440 and QFX5100.
> There are (very) slow limit on label stacking due to the chip.
> Quoting the doc (Read
> - Push of a maximum of three labels is supported in the MPLS edge switch
> if label swap is not done.
> - Push of a maximum of two labels is supported in the MPLS edge switch
> if label swap is done.
> Raphael Mazelier
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
More information about the juniper-nsp