 |
 |
Do you want the LAG split between the 4500 and 4550? Jay On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I will probably be there tomorrow to assist in the physical portion of the > installation with Doug/Anthony. I volunteer to be the guinea pig, and test > for loss prior to scheduling a maintenance window to cut over the other 1G > members on. > > Jay, could you give us port assignments for the L2 link to the 4500s, and > an IP for the new switch. > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Ryan Goldberg > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:07 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > Participants > > Ok, it's there. Firmwared (holy crap I forget the hell that is the time > commitment to firmware ex4200) to as listed below and with c13/c14 cables > and stacking cables. > > me0.0 is dhcp > > root is mice987z > > admin is mice987z > > ssh is on > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Ryan Goldberg > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 12:06 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > Participants > > Pulled jinstall-ex-4200-12.3R12.4-domestic-signed just now. > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Andrew Hoyos > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 12:05 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > Participants > > JTAC recommended is R12. Looking at the release notes, seems like a bunch > of minor stuff, but a few PFE crash related fixes that apply to EX4200. > > -- > Andrew Hoyos > [log in to unmask] > > > > > On Sep 21, 2016, at 12:01 PM, Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > Probably makes sense to match the current version on the other > > switches of 12.3R9-S1 > > > > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > > Of Ryan Goldberg > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:58 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > > Participants > > > > Ok, so I’ll leave the 4200-24 with the 2x 10gig and a stacking cable. > > > > Anyone have a firmware preference? Or just current juniper recommend? > > > > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > > Of Ryan Goldberg > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 8:38 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > > Participants > > > > I’m only partially tracking the thread but wasn’t there going to be a > normal 2 x 10gig LAG into the “new” switch? > > > > Either way, I have available today: > > > > 1 x 4200-48 poe with the 2 x sfp+ module and 2 x PS > > 2 x 4200-24 with the 2 x sfp+ module and 2 x PS > > 1 x 3300 > > 1 x HP 28284 J > > 3 x 4200/4500 stacking cables > > > > I can default and leave one of these in the mice cabinet. No extra > optics or DACs today… I can leave a stacking cable though. > > > > I’d like to do the defaulting/(and firmwaring) this AM around 10:30 and > would deliver to mice cabinet around 2pm. > > > > So, whoever wants to make the final “I’LL TAKE THAT ONE” call lemme know > and I’ll deliver. > > > > You can also drop me a line at 218-390-5485. > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > > Of Levi Pederson > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 8:28 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > > Participants > > > > All, > > > > 3300's Can't join a Mixed 45**. We'd have to monitor it separately. > Troubleshooting, monitoring and management would be easier with another > 4200/4500/4550. > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > Levi Pederson > > Mankato Networks LLC > > cell | 612.481.0769 > > work | 612.787.7392 > > [log in to unmask] > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Ben Wiechman <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > We may have a couple EX3300 as well. I can check tomorrow if there is > any interest. > > > > > > On Sep 20, 2016 4:50 PM, "Ryan Goldberg" <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > provided my work tonight goes as planned I can leave a: > > > > FPC 2 REV 18 750-021255 BQ0209437984 EX4200-48P, 48 > POE > > CPU BUILTIN BUILTIN FPC CPU > > PIC 0 BUILTIN BUILTIN 48x 10/100/1000 > Base-T > > PIC 1 REV 04 711-026017 CH0209419573 2x 10GE SFP+ > > > > > > in the mice cabinet (or elsewhere). > > > > note: no optics... but I could leave a couple DACs probably > > > > I could leave 24 port non-POE 4200 if preferred. Why do I have 48 port > poe switch at 511? So many questions.... > > > > Or........ I may have a 3300-24 available, which gives 4x SFP+ instead. > > > > Any preferences whilst I rummage through my oddball grab bag? > > > > > > From: MICE Discuss <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of > > Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 3:45 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > > Participants > > > > I am in favor, THANKS GUYS!!! > > > > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > > Of Jason Hanke > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 3:41 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > > Participants > > > > Compudyne has offered to donate an EX4200 with a 2x10G uplink card to > MICE to help the cause. > > > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > I am in favor of a regular layer 2 uplink. I think the main reason I > feel this way is it is industry standard, and then the switch has its own > forwarding table. We have seen issues in the past where if the link on a > high volume port goes down, the MAC gets removed from the forwarding table, > and then all of that traffic gets flooded to all other ports until BGP > times out. This seems to be especially problematic when it hits the 1G > ports. > > > > My vision of a future upgrade would be something along the lines of a > 5200, or equiv from another manufacturer that has all of the other switches > uplinked to it. Then we would have separate forwarding tables, a place to > connect remote switches, as well as something that has some 40G, and 100G > capabilities. All of the uplinks would then be easy to monitor/graph > without excessive load on the switch. Copper SFP+/QSFP+ cables can be used > between switches and they are affordable/easy to come by. > > > > Jeremy > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > > Of Doug McIntyre > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 3:15 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G > > Participants > > > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 02:23:00PM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > > > That would make sense, then we are just down to how traffic can > > > leave the 4200 without going across a vcp > > > > Most likely we'd have to kick off (umm. move) the three members that > > are fiber 1G connections in the expansion slot on the 4200, get a 10G > > card, optics for both sides, etc. Then decide if we are going to run > > virtual chassis protocol, or just layer-2 uplink into the two other > switches. > > > > Or we move the 19 active 1G copper members + 3 1G fiber members off > > the 4200 altogether and eat up ports on the 4550 with 19 copper SFPs. > > Then we wouldn't have to do "Mixed-mode Virtual-Chassis" then either. > > > > > Although- it looks like so far all the paths with loss seem to have > "vcp-1" in them? > > > > As I've stated multiple times, I think since VCP is active/passive, > > there is only one active ring around the the VC through VCP-1 now, and > > I would expect to see vcp-1 in all paths through the EX4200. > > > > We can swap active and passive with the command I posted previously. > > That way we can troubleshoot if there is a port/cable issue, or if it > > is an issue with the device itself. > > > > Or it could be a defect in this coderev (although I doubt it). > > > > > > -- > > Doug McIntyre <[log in to unmask]> > > ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ > > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades > > > > > > > > -- > > Jay Hanke > > CTO > > Neutral Path Communications > > 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 > > Mankato, MN 56001 > > (507) 327-2398 mobile > > [log in to unmask] > > www.neutralpath.net > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile [log in to unmask] www.neutralpath.net