Mailing List Archive

I have an MX304 in the lab, evaluating it at the moment. Junos: 22.2R3.15

Telemetry is running and a little different than what I have on my MX960’s

Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore




Aaron

> On Oct 18, 2023, at 7:40 AM, Giuliano C. Medalha via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> ?
> Good morning
>
> All good ?
>
> Anyone already running MX304 as an edge, using ipfix, flowspec and telemetry features on the same box ?
>
>
> Any problems related with that ?
>
> If so, what version of Junos are you using?
>
> Thanks
>
> Giuliano
>
>
> WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
> Copyright (c) 2023 WZTECH NETWORKS. All Rights Reserved.
>
> IMPORTANTE:
> As informa??es deste e-mail e o conte?do dos eventuais documentos anexos s?o confidenciais e para conhecimento exclusivo do destinat?rio. Se o leitor desta mensagem n?o for o seu destinat?rio, fica desde j? notificado de que n?o poder? divulgar, distribuir ou, sob qualquer forma, dar conhecimento a terceiros das informa??es e do conte?do dos documentos anexos. Neste caso, favor comunicar imediatamente o remetente, respondendo este e-mail ou telefonando ao mesmo, e em seguida apague-o.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
> The information transmitted in this email message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, transmission, dissemination or other use of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the material from any computer, including any copies.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Also saw this message too…

Error related to jflow-specific reporting rate

[edit services analytics]
'sensor my-sensor-21'
reporting-rate can't be less than 30sec for Inline Jflow Sensor on mx304!
error: configuration check-out failed


Aaron

> On Oct 18, 2023, at 8:48 AM, Aaron1 <aaron1@gvtc.com> wrote:
>
> ?I have an MX304 in the lab, evaluating it at the moment. Junos: 22.2R3.15
>
> Telemetry is running and a little different than what I have on my MX960’s
>
> Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
>
>
>
>
> Aaron
>
>> On Oct 18, 2023, at 7:40 AM, Giuliano C. Medalha via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>>
>> ?
>> Good morning
>>
>> All good ?
>>
>> Anyone already running MX304 as an edge, using ipfix, flowspec and telemetry features on the same box ?
>>
>>
>> Any problems related with that ?
>>
>> If so, what version of Junos are you using?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Giuliano
>>
>>
>> WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
>> Copyright (c) 2023 WZTECH NETWORKS. All Rights Reserved.
>>
>> IMPORTANTE:
>> As informa??es deste e-mail e o conte?do dos eventuais documentos anexos s?o confidenciais e para conhecimento exclusivo do destinat?rio. Se o leitor desta mensagem n?o for o seu destinat?rio, fica desde j? notificado de que n?o poder? divulgar, distribuir ou, sob qualquer forma, dar conhecimento a terceiros das informa??es e do conte?do dos documentos anexos. Neste caso, favor comunicar imediatamente o remetente, respondendo este e-mail ou telefonando ao mesmo, e em seguida apague-o.
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
>> The information transmitted in this email message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, transmission, dissemination or other use of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the material from any computer, including any copies.
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 10/18/23 15:47, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp wrote:

> Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore

Any details on what this license does, and if there is any operational
risk if you don't apply it?

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

Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
just grump at you on commits.

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:32?AM Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

>
>
> On 10/18/23 15:47, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
> > Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a
> license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
>
> Any details on what this license does, and if there is any operational
> risk if you don't apply it?
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

If unlicensed, you even get a license warning for a static route.

We have a handful deployed, and being a trio based platform they perform as
expected.

Hot swapping LMIC support are being explored and of course would be
welcome.

Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
extensively discussed in a different thread.

--Chris

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, 08:47 Aaron1 via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> I have an MX304 in the lab, evaluating it at the moment. Junos: 22.2R3.15
>
> Telemetry is running and a little different than what I have on my MX960’s
>
> Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a
> license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
>
>
>
>
> Aaron
>
> > On Oct 18, 2023, at 7:40 AM, Giuliano C. Medalha via juniper-nsp <
> juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> >
> > ?
> > Good morning
> >
> > All good ?
> >
> > Anyone already running MX304 as an edge, using ipfix, flowspec and
> telemetry features on the same box ?
> >
> >
> > Any problems related with that ?
> >
> > If so, what version of Junos are you using?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Giuliano
> >
> >
> > WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
> > Copyright (c) 2023 WZTECH NETWORKS. All Rights Reserved.
> >
> > IMPORTANTE:
> > As informa??es deste e-mail e o conte?do dos eventuais documentos anexos
> s?o confidenciais e para conhecimento exclusivo do destinat?rio. Se o
> leitor desta mensagem n?o for o seu destinat?rio, fica desde j? notificado
> de que n?o poder? divulgar, distribuir ou, sob qualquer forma, dar
> conhecimento a terceiros das informa??es e do conte?do dos documentos
> anexos. Neste caso, favor comunicar imediatamente o remetente, respondendo
> este e-mail ou telefonando ao mesmo, e em seguida apague-o.
> >
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
> > The information transmitted in this email message and any attachments
> are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any review,
> transmission, dissemination or other use of this information is prohibited.
> If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete the material from any computer, including any copies.
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 10/18/23 18:55, Tom Beecher wrote:

> Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
> just grump at you on commits.

Okay, so usual licensing enforcement.

Just curious why warnings about OSPF and LDP... this is what a router is
exactly for.

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

On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:

> Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
> extensively discussed in a different thread.

I have an update on that...

Our request was granted, and Juniper are initially targeting to fix this
in Junos 24.1. However, there are ongoing discussions to introduce this
into 23.3R2.

So we may soon see the back of this.

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

Indeed. Apologies to all --- I too got an update from JNPR on the "show route" vs "show routing" CLI conflict a few weeks ago in early September -- but forgot to share it here.


CASE;
2023-0719-733950

Synopsis:
"show route" and "show routing" operational mode CLI conflict - JunOS 21+

Root Cause:
"show routing" CLI stanza was unhidden to implement "show routing transport-class" command for BGP CT (in JunOS 21+)

Resolution:
For finger memory convenience, hiding 'show routing' stanza again, and moving BGP CT command to under 'show route' stanza.
Understanding is: "show route" will now contain both:
- route table related information, AND
- routing daemon related information.


-------------------------

Looks like it's a win for the little guy!.. or at least... my little finger that wants to smash that [TAB] key early

- CK.



> On 19 Oct 2023, at 15:11, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
>> Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
>> extensively discussed in a different thread.
>
> I have an update on that...
>
> Our request was granted, and Juniper are initially targeting to fix this in Junos 24.1. However, there are ongoing discussions to introduce this into 23.3R2.
>
> So we may soon see the back of this.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 10/19/23 06:48, Chris Kawchuk wrote:
> Indeed. Apologies to all --- I too got an update from JNPR on the "show route" vs "show routing" CLI conflict a few weeks ago in early September -- but forgot to share it here.
>
>
> CASE;
> 2023-0719-733950
>
> Synopsis:
> "show route" and "show routing" operational mode CLI conflict - JunOS 21+
>
> Root Cause:
> "show routing" CLI stanza was unhidden to implement "show routing transport-class" command for BGP CT (in JunOS 21+)
>
> Resolution:
> For finger memory convenience, hiding 'show routing' stanza again, and moving BGP CT command to under 'show route' stanza.
> Understanding is: "show route" will now contain both:
> - route table related information, AND
> - routing daemon related information.
>
>
> -------------------------
>
> Looks like it's a win for the little guy!.. or at least... my little finger that wants to smash that [TAB] key early

Indeed!

We can be pleased.

Well done to all :-).

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

And thank you all that responded to the request to open cases. Easy contributions to make the case, and far fewer meetings to resolve than it could have been.

-- Jeff (who made noise, but did no source code commits)


+/v8-On 10/19/23, 12:48 AM, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Chris Kawchuk via juniper-nsp" <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:


[External Email. Be cautious of content]




Indeed. Apologies to all --- I too got an update from JNPR on the "show route" vs "show routing" CLI conflict a few weeks ago in early September -- but forgot to share it here.




CASE;
2023-0719-733950


Synopsis:
"show route" and "show routing" operational mode CLI conflict - JunOS 21+-


Root Cause:
"show routing" CLI stanza was unhidden to implement "show routing transport-class" command for BGP CT (in JunOS 21+-)


Resolution:
For finger memory convenience, hiding 'show routing' stanza again, and moving BGP CT command to under 'show route' stanza.
Understanding is: "show route" will now contain both:
- route table related information, AND
- routing daemon related information.




-------------------------


Looks like it's a win for the little guy!.. or at least... my little finger that wants to smash that [TAB] key early


- CK.






> On 19 Oct 2023, at 15:11, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:
>
>
>

Juniper Business Use Only
> On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
>> Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
>> extensively discussed in a different thread.
>
> I have an update on that...
>
> Our request was granted, and Juniper are initially targeting to fix this in Junos 24.1. However, there are ongoing discussions to introduce this into 23.3R2.
>
> So we may soon see the back of this.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!C_6PZngMiSXTB1xXpGghoUeKt-rg44pq-PsMHtvBZylmhWDehdYkTbkgVwgj1HU0JVwhzsN8yZ4YLoXD_Cbv8ss$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!C_6PZngMiSXTB1xXpGghoUeKt-rg44pq-PsMHtvBZylmhWDehdYkTbkgVwgj1HU0JVwhzsN8yZ4YLoXD_Cbv8ss$>


_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!C_6PZngMiSXTB1xXpGghoUeKt-rg44pq-PsMHtvBZylmhWDehdYkTbkgVwgj1HU0JVwhzsN8yZ4YLoXD_Cbv8ss$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!C_6PZngMiSXTB1xXpGghoUeKt-rg44pq-PsMHtvBZylmhWDehdYkTbkgVwgj1HU0JVwhzsN8yZ4YLoXD_Cbv8ss$>



_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

my tab and spacebar auto-complete is working...22.2R3.15

{master}
me@mx304> show system information
Model: mx304
Family: junos
Junos: 22.2R3.15
Hostname: mx304



On 10/18/2023 11:11 PM, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
>
> On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
>> Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
>> extensively discussed in a different thread.
>
> I have an update on that...
>
> Our request was granted, and Juniper are initially targeting to fix
> this in Junos 24.1. However, there are ongoing discussions to
> introduce this into 23.3R2.
>
> So we may soon see the back of this.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

--
-Aaron

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Aaron,

I think the problem is related to the following:

> show rout?

- route
- routing

.. Think ... that is the problem of autocomplete that everyone is talking about.

At.te

Giuliano



-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Aaron Gould via juniper-nsp
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 3:28 PM
To: Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa>; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] MX304 - Edge Router

my tab and spacebar auto-complete is working...22.2R3.15

{master}
me@mx304> show system information
Model: mx304
Family: junos
Junos: 22.2R3.15
Hostname: mx304



On 10/18/2023 11:11 PM, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
>
> On 10/18/23 19:05, Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp wrote:
>
>> Only complaint is Junos related, with auto tab complete problems as
>> extensively discussed in a different thread.
>
> I have an update on that...
>
> Our request was granted, and Juniper are initially targeting to fix
> this in Junos 24.1. However, there are ongoing discussions to
> introduce this into 23.3R2.
>
> So we may soon see the back of this.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck/
> .nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fjuniper-nsp&data=05%7C01%7Cgiuliano
> %40wztech.com.br%7C09159c2d48f94443e0bb08dbd0d129a4%7C584787b077bd4312
> bf8815412b8ae504%7C1%7C0%7C638333369018957546%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8
> eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3
> 000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=hUQFLTiKLjPUQNCoM4bWFlZzCQq2Tx0AlwzDl57r%2B04%3D&re
> served=0

--
-Aaron

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
Copyright © 2023 WZTECH NETWORKS. All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANTE:
As informações deste e-mail e o conteúdo dos eventuais documentos anexos são confidenciais e para conhecimento exclusivo do destinatário. Se o leitor desta mensagem não for o seu destinatário, fica desde já notificado de que não poderá divulgar, distribuir ou, sob qualquer forma, dar conhecimento a terceiros das informações e do conteúdo dos documentos anexos. Neste caso, favor comunicar imediatamente o remetente, respondendo este e-mail ou telefonando ao mesmo, e em seguida apague-o.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The information transmitted in this email message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, transmission, dissemination or other use of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the material from any computer, including any copies.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

To reiterate and add to my previous email…also, please realize I’m in my early stages of learning about telemetry and Junos capabilities, so this is only what little I’ve seen and understand about it thus far…

As a side note, the ACX7100-48L has been a challenge regarding telemetry as well, and I’m learning that a different telemetry method using gRPC subscription model of request/reply may yield more capabilities… and so I wonder if the same is true regarding MX304, again, still learning…

Using the native telemetry like I do on my MX960's seems to be working somewhat on the MX304. Not all sensors though. Also, I did have to alter a jflow sensor reporting-rate

[edit services analytics]
'sensor my-sensor-21'
reporting-rate can't be less than 30sec for Inline Jflow Sensor on mx304!
error: configuration check-out failed

so i had to change it like this... but all others I left at reporting-rate 1

set services analytics export-profile my-exprt-prfl-jflow local-address 10.101.12.234
set services analytics export-profile my-exprt-prfl-jflow local-port 12234
set services analytics export-profile my-exprt-prfl-jflow reporting-rate 30
set services analytics export-profile my-exprt-prfl-jflow format gpb
set services analytics export-profile my-exprt-prfl-jflow transport udp

set services analytics sensor my-sensor-21 server-name my-grafana-srvr-08
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-21 server-name my-grafana-srvr-04
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-21 export-name my-exprt-prfl-jflow
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-21 resource /junos/system/linecard/services/inline-jflow/

also, in my chronograf (like grafana) web interface, I'm not seeing the MX304 send telemetry data for some things, like these...

works... i see data auto-populating in my telem server

me@mx960> show configuration services analytics | display set | grep memo
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-2 resource /junos/system/linecard/cpu/memory/
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-17 resource /junos/system/linecard/npu/memory/

doesn't work, I don't see data for these sensors from mx304, but, to be clear, mx304 does auto-sent telem data for other sensors

me@mx304> show configuration services analytics | display set | grep memo
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-2 resource /junos/system/linecard/cpu/memory/
set services analytics sensor my-sensor-17 resource /junos/system/linecard/npu/memory/

Aaron

> On Oct 18, 2023, at 8:48 AM, Aaron1 <aaron1@gvtc.com> wrote:
>
> ?I have an MX304 in the lab, evaluating it at the moment. Junos: 22.2R3.15
>
> Telemetry is running and a little different than what I have on my MX960’s
>
> Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
>
>
>
>
> Aaron
>
>> On Oct 18, 2023, at 7:40 AM, Giuliano C. Medalha via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>>
>> ?
>> Good morning
>>
>> All good ?
>>
>> Anyone already running MX304 as an edge, using ipfix, flowspec and telemetry features on the same box ?
>>
>>
>> Any problems related with that ?
>>
>> If so, what version of Junos are you using?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Giuliano
>>
>>
>> WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
>> Copyright (c) 2023 WZTECH NETWORKS. All Rights Reserved.
>>
>> IMPORTANTE:
>> As informa??es deste e-mail e o conte?do dos eventuais documentos anexos s?o confidenciais e para conhecimento exclusivo do destinat?rio. Se o leitor desta mensagem n?o for o seu destinat?rio, fica desde j? notificado de que n?o poder? divulgar, distribuir ou, sob qualquer forma, dar conhecimento a terceiros das informa??es e do conte?do dos documentos anexos. Neste caso, favor comunicar imediatamente o remetente, respondendo este e-mail ou telefonando ao mesmo, e em seguida apague-o.
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
>> The information transmitted in this email message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, transmission, dissemination or other use of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the material from any computer, including any copies.
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 18/10/2023 18:55, Tom Beecher via juniper-nsp wrote:
> Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
> just grump at you on commits.
It depends. MACSEC on EX and QFX first had a license warning and a permanent minor alert when configured on these platforms. With Junos 18 they introduced MACSEC License Enforcement, i.e. no more MACSEC for you if you don't have a valid license installed.
https://supportportal.juniper.net/s/article/MACsec-license-enforcement-on-EX-and-QFX-Series-Switches?language=en_US

Introducing license warnings and minor alerts when conifguring a static route on MX304 might be a sign of things to come. When buying MX304, you are now running the risk of this device only being able to work as a switch after a firmware upgrade, unless you have a valid license installed.

Regards
Karl


> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:32?AM Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <
> juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 10/18/23 15:47, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp wrote:
>>
>>> Also, I get a license warning when committing OSPF and LDP. We got a
>> license from our account team and now we don’t see that message anymore
>>
>> Any details on what this license does, and if there is any operational
>> risk if you don't apply it?
>>
>> Mark.
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing listjuniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing listjuniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
various protocols no longer work.  This seems more than just
honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function.  This is new to me;
that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license.  I
need to understand more about this, as I'm considering buying MX304's.

-Aaron

On 10/24/2023 4:18 AM, Karl Gerhard via juniper-nsp wrote:
> On 18/10/2023 18:55, Tom Beecher via juniper-nsp wrote:
>> Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
>> just grump at you on commits.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

>
> My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
> various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
> honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
> that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license. I
> need to understand more about this, as I'm considering buying MX304's.
>

This is news to me as well. Definitely not the case on smaller or much
larger MXes.

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 3:20?PM Aaron Gould <aaron1@gvtc.com> wrote:

> My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
> various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
> honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
> that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license. I
> need to understand more about this, as I'm considering buying MX304's.
>
> -Aaron
>
> On 10/24/2023 4:18 AM, Karl Gerhard via juniper-nsp wrote:
> > On 18/10/2023 18:55, Tom Beecher via juniper-nsp wrote:
> >> Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
> >> just grump at you on commits.
>
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 22:21, Aaron Gould via juniper-nsp
<juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
> various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
> honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
> that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license. I
> need to understand more about this, as I'm considering buying MX304's.

Juniper had assured me multiple times that they strategically have
decided to NEVER do this. That it's an actual decision they've
considered at the highest level, that they will not downgrade devices
in operation. I guess 'reboot' is not in-operation?

Notion that operators are able to keep licenses up-to-date and valid
is naive, we can't keep SSL certificates valid and we've had decades
of time to learn, it won't happen. You will learn about the problem,
when shit breaks.

The right solution would be a phone-home, and a vendor sales rep
calling you 'hey you have expired licenses, let's solve this'. Not
breaking the boxes. Or 'your phone home hasn't worked, you need to fix
it before we can re-up your support contract'.
--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

* Karl Gerhard via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> [2023-10-24 11:18]:
> On 18/10/2023 18:55, Tom Beecher via juniper-nsp wrote:
> > Juniper licensing is honor based. Won't impact functionality, will
> > just grump at you on commits.
> It depends. MACSEC on EX and QFX first had a license warning and a
> permanent minor alert when configured on these platforms. With Junos
> 18 they introduced MACSEC License Enforcement, i.e. no more MACSEC
> for you if you don't have a valid license installed.

Yeah it depends. Our MX204 also needed licenses for subscriber
managment. Some options would produce a license warning and some other
stuff just failed silently which was worse. Also noone at Juniper
seemed to know WHICH licenses we needed for our usecase.

In the end our license list looked like this:

subscriber-accounting
subscriber-authentication
subscriber-address-assignment
subscriber-vlan
subscriber-ip
scale-subscriber
scale-l2tp
l2tp-inline-lns

So yeah.. that wasn't a nice experience at all.

Best Regards

Sebastian

--
'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE.
-- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Am 25.10.2023 um 08:01 schrieb Saku Ytti via juniper-nsp:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 22:21, Aaron Gould via juniper-nsp
> <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>> My MX304 trial license expired last night, after rebooting the MX304,
>> various protocols no longer work. This seems more than just
>> honor-based... ospf, ldp, etc, no longer function. This is new to me;
>> that Juniper is making protocols and technologies tied to license. I
>> need to understand more about this, as I'm considering buying MX304's.
>
> Juniper had assured me multiple times that they strategically have
> decided to NEVER do this. That it's an actual decision they've
> considered at the highest level, that they will not downgrade devices
> in operation. I guess 'reboot' is not in-operation?

I am surprised and it goes against everything i have seen and
experienced so far on any MX (including MX304).

So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they have
always been enforced. Subscriber MGMT is one of these features.

Also some form of encryption is typically enforced due to export
regulations and other silly things. Also the rare use cases where
external feeds (e.g. for stateful services on services cards) might expire.

That being said, i have not yet seen any expired flex license on any MX
as we typically play with perpetuals. But not having a license has never
killed features like Routing Protocols, LDP or similar for me. We run
the boxes in the lab without licenses regularly (because we are too lazy
to (re)apply them between tests and/or wipes) including MX304 and Junos
up to 23.2.

I would be very surprised if there are actually code path that kill
features in Junos on purpose yet (having seen the quality of the other
parts of the license parser).

So i would rather suspect some weird combination of misbehaviour and/or
bug and not an intention to disable stuff for now.

The flex license nagging comes in different stages and intensity
depending e.g. in HW and sometimes card Generation, which makes license
mgmt a lot of "fun" in chassis with cards that "need" a license and
cards that "can have" a license and cards than "do not need" a license
at all :)

The SE teams (or your partner of choice) have access to the current
plans of where license nagging and license installation is needed to
stop the nagging and where it is optional.

I will try to get my hands on a short live trial license to replicate
that behaviour soonish to look into that now :)

After all ... there is not much that surprise me any more on vendor
licensing ...

regards
Tobias
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Hello,

> So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they have
> always been enforced. Subscriber MGMT is one of these features.

Well I remember wanted to use dhcp server on a MX204 for a local lan used only...
for local administrators... that required some license I didn't have....

Well this thing was working like a charm on M7i (yeah this is attic I know), and
it never asked me a license for spawning isc-dhcpd ...
So no this is no more "honor based".
They copy the worse part of Cisco with their license mess...

Xavier
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Am 25.10.2023 um 11:57 schrieb Xavier Beaudouin via juniper-nsp:
>> So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they have
>> always been enforced. Subscriber MGMT is one of these features.
>
> Well I remember wanted to use dhcp server on a MX204 for a local lan used only...
> for local administrators... that required some license I didn't have....
>
> Well this thing was working like a charm on M7i (yeah this is attic I know), and
> it never asked me a license for spawning isc-dhcpd ...
> So no this is no more "honor based".
> They copy the worse part of Cisco with their license mess...

It does not help, but this actually makes sense in a weird way :)

local dhcp server on MX is considered a feature which sources in the
Subscriber mgmt part of the code and hence depends on the subscriber
mgmt features i mentioned above. And these were always enforced on MX.

regards
Tobias
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Years ago I had to get a license to make my 10g interfaces work on my MX104

Aaron

> On Oct 25, 2023, at 5:03 AM, Tobias Heister via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> ?Am 25.10.2023 um 11:57 schrieb Xavier Beaudouin via juniper-nsp:
>>> So there are a couple of enforced licenses even on MX ... and they have
>>> always been enforced. Subscriber MGMT is one of these features.
>> Well I remember wanted to use dhcp server on a MX204 for a local lan used only...
>> for local administrators... that required some license I didn't have....
>> Well this thing was working like a charm on M7i (yeah this is attic I know), and
>> it never asked me a license for spawning isc-dhcpd ...
>> So no this is no more "honor based".
>> They copy the worse part of Cisco with their license mess...
>
> It does not help, but this actually makes sense in a weird way :)
>
> local dhcp server on MX is considered a feature which sources in the Subscriber mgmt part of the code and hence depends on the subscriber mgmt features i mentioned above. And these were always enforced on MX.
>
> regards
> Tobias
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 15:26, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp
<juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> Years ago I had to get a license to make my 10g interfaces work on my MX104

I think we need to be careful in what we are saying.

We can't reject licences out right, that's not a fair ask and it won't happen.

But we can reject licenses that expire in operation and cause an
outage. That I think is a very reasonable ask. I know that IOS XE for
example will do this, you run out of license and your box breaks. I
swapped out from CRS1k to ASR1k because I knew the organisation would
eventually fail to fix the license ahead of expiry.

I'm happy if the device calls homes via https proxy, and reports my
license use, and the sales droid tells me I'm not compliant with
terms. Making it a commercial problem is fine, making it an acute
technical problem is not.


In your specific case, the ports never worked, you had to procure a
license, and the license never dies. So from my POV, this is fine. And
being absolutist here will not help, as then you can't even achieve
reasonable compromise.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Am 25.10.2023 um 14:25 schrieb Aaron1:
> Years ago I had to get a license to make my 10g interfaces work on my MX104

If we are going into the HW direction and not features. Yes, that is
correct MX104 had some Port based licensing.

There was also MX5 -> MX10 -> MX40 -> MX80
And some not so enforced things like "only MS-MIC in Slot X" etc. :)

regards
Tobias
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp