Hairpin NAT with MS-MIC
Hello. We are a small ISP and some of our customers are configured with a 1:1 nat. Example below uses 128.66.0.1 as their "public IP" and 100.64.0.1 as their "inside IP". What do I need to add so that...
View ArticleRe: Hairpin NAT with MS-MIC
If you want 2 different source IPs to use single public ip as a source ip, you can use napt44. Are you using inline NAT or have service PIC (MS-MIC) in your MX box ? And, Last but not least, may i...
View ArticleRe: Hairpin NAT with MS-MIC
As the title says, I do have an MS-MIC. If I want to source NAT traffic from my customer when they initiate communication to hosts on the public internet and also want to destination NAT inbound...
View ArticleRe: Hairpin NAT with MS-MIC
Hi, You can use below config example to do this.PS: I configured next-hop style NAT root@mx480# show service-set Hairpin-testnat-rules Pri-to-Pub;nat-rules Pub-to-pri;nat-rules...
View ArticleSecGW on Juniper MX Platform ?? Possible?
Hallo Community, Has anyone ever seen such deployment where MX is used to Secure eNodeB's in a SP Network?I understand, there's a dedicated solution with the SRX Platforms, but we have a scenario where...
View ArticleRe: SecGW on Juniper MX Platform ?? Possible?
Maybe you are looking for thishttps://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/solutions/information-products/pathway-pages/mobile-backhaul-mx-secgw-dg.pdf
View ArticleRe: L2TP MX240 LNS
Hi, You can refer below two KB. Let me know where exactly you're facing issue with LNS....
View ArticleRe: L2TP MX240 LNS
Hi Mayar, Thank you for the links.... unfortunately neither of them work (Either I need a login ID or the document no longer exists)... My issue is that although I have worked on L2TP before, I have...
View ArticleRe: SecGW on Juniper MX Platform ?? Possible?
singhh wrote:Maybe you are looking for thishttps://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/solutions/information-products/pathway-pages/mobile-backhaul-mx-secgw-dg.pdf Thank you Sir....
View ArticleRe: L2TP MX240 LNS
Simple LAC configuration on MX. Interface configuration: [edit] jtac@MX-240-2-RE0# show interfaces ge-2/1/9 description "Towards CLIENT; vlan-tagging; unit 100 { encapsulation ppp-over-ether; vlan-id...
View ArticleClass Of Service: Packet or Session
Hello, I'm starting with CoS on a MX104 and reading the CoS Guide. 1 - When I use the firewall filter to classifiy the input of an interface, is the CoS for the whole session or just the packet?2 - The...
View ArticleRe: Class Of Service: Packet or Session
Hi, 1. COS will be applied to all the packets which are matching to the firewall. 2nd point is not clear to me, can you please elaborate more. Thnx
View Articleuse a specific lsp for a l3VPN when LDP is the common protocol
Hi,I have problem to force traffic to use a specfic lsp instead of ldp.Is it supported in VMX (16.1) or is something wrong with my configuration?Corouting-options { router-id 10.250.0.4;...
View ArticleRe: use a specific lsp for a l3VPN when LDP is the common protocol
Can you remove below command and check?no-install-to-address Also Before doing this, can you check if you egress router ip in inet.3 table?
View ArticleRe: use a specific lsp for a l3VPN when LDP is the common protocol
Hi, I think you can not use specific LSP for an instance when using LDP and RSVP. This policy works if you have 2 equal cost LSP paths. The below old thread in the forum has great details. Selecting an...
View ArticleRe: use a specific lsp for a l3VPN when LDP is the common protocol
Few thought.. First: of all you need to remove this command because it's preventing RSVP route form being install into inet.3no-install-to-address If you don't resolve BGP next-hop with rsvp route in...
View ArticleRe: use a specific lsp for a l3VPN when LDP is the common protocol
Hi,Thanks for your comments. The idea is that only a specific l3vpn should use the rsvp path, rest of the l3vpns should use ldp. I have removed the no-install-to-address + changed the preference to 10...
View ArticleRe: use a specific lsp for a l3VPN when LDP is the common protocol
Hi,You have right about the forwarding policy.It start to work direclty when I did two lsp. //Niklas
View ArticleStatic RP election in multicast
Hi all, The election of configuration static RP in multicast depends on longest subnet mask or not? For example, which router will be the RP? A. R1 for all groups. B. R4 for group 224.1.1.12 and R1 for...
View Article