Mailing List Archive

>
> Is there a difference between "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>

Strictly speaking they are just different SKUs, not different models.

MX204 : Chassis + Fan trays + PEMs
MX204-HW-BASE : Base MX204 chassis PLUS perpetual Junos software license

AFAIK , code that has enforcement is limited to specific scaling or more
advanced features, but outside of that, base things just work. Don't take
that as gospel though.

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 8:19?AM chiel via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> Is there a difference between "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>
> I thought the "MX204" has honored based license, which isn't sold
> anymore. Where the "MX204-HW-BASE" (also end of sale but still widely
> available) enforces the license after version 22.2R1 for BGP. Is this
> assumption correct?
>
> If there is indeed this difference how can I distinguish these two
> platforms from the CLI?
>
> I have a MX204 with version 22.3R3.8 without a license installed on it
> and its doing BGP just fine. So I guess I have the older MX204 model?
>
> I'm asking as I'm looking for a spare (refurb) unit for my current router.
>
> admin@router> show system license
> License usage:
> Licenses Licenses Licenses
> Feature Feature Feature
> Feature name used installed needed Expiry
> scale-subscriber 0 10 0 permanent
> scale-l2tp 0 1000 0 permanent
> bgp 1 0 1 invalid
> l3static 1 0 1 invalid
> ospf 1 0 1 invalid
>
> Licenses installed: none
>
>
> admin@router> show chassis hardware
> Hardware inventory:
> Item Version Part number Serial number Description
> Chassis XXXXX JNP204 [MX204]
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 10 Jan 2024 at 14:18, chiel via juniper-nsp
<juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> Is there a difference between "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>
> I thought the "MX204" has honored based license, which isn't sold
> anymore. Where the "MX204-HW-BASE" (also end of sale but still widely
> available) enforces the license after version 22.2R1 for BGP. Is this
> assumption correct?
>
> If there is indeed this difference how can I distinguish these two
> platforms from the CLI?
>
> I have a MX204 with version 22.3R3.8 without a license installed on it
> and its doing BGP just fine. So I guess I have the older MX204 model?

Last I heard back from a contact at VAR we use at $dayjob was to
downgrade to <= 22.1R2-S1 (H1/2023). I.e. 22.2 and above will
enforce the new license schema. No clarification have had been
received what Juniper intends to do concerning MX204 owners
with the "old" perpetual license. Wishing to upgrade to newer
22.2 or 22.4 releases.

If you have a support contract with them. I recommend estacalting
the question with them.

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

Confusing, yes! As chiel wrote, these are just ordering SKU. Neither should be used for new orders. Instead “MX204-HWBASE-AC-FS” should be used, but “MX204-HW-BASE” is still allowed for legacy ordering. These are both priced the same, and basically provide exact same HW parts.

The “difference” is that either SKU above does not contain a [Flex] Feature License. Some Feature License, Adv or Prem, at some term (years or perpetual) must now be included if you want any MX to do any L3 or above features. So basically without some Feature License tied the HW SN via some Flex Feature License, it is a good boat anchor!

For information on Flex Licenses go here - https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/license/juniper-licensing-user-guide/topics/concept/licenses-for-juniper-software.html

This change in how MX and other Juniper products has been driven by Stock Analysist and other vendors. “I don’t make the news, I just report it”

For any questions, reach out to either your Juniper Partner or Juniper Account team.

FYI Only. Regards, Rich

Richard McGovern
Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
978-618-3342

I’d rather be lucky than good, as I know I am not good
I don’t make the news, I just report it




Juniper Business Use Only

On 1/10/24, 10:43 AM, "Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc> wrote:
>
> Is there a difference between "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>

Strictly speaking they are just different SKUs, not different models.

MX204 : Chassis + Fan trays + PEMs
MX204-HW-BASE : Base MX204 chassis PLUS perpetual Junos software license

AFAIK , code that has enforcement is limited to specific scaling or more
advanced features, but outside of that, base things just work. Don't take
that as gospel though.

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 8:19?AM chiel via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

> Is there a difference between "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>
> I thought the "MX204" has honored based license, which isn't sold
> anymore. Where the "MX204-HW-BASE" (also end of sale but still widely
> available) enforces the license after version 22.2R1 for BGP. Is this
> assumption correct?
>
> If there is indeed this difference how can I distinguish these two
> platforms from the CLI?
>
> I have a MX204 with version 22.3R3.8 without a license installed on it
> and its doing BGP just fine. So I guess I have the older MX204 model?
>
> I'm asking as I'm looking for a spare (refurb) unit for my current router.
>
> admin@router> show system license
> License usage:
> Licenses Licenses Licenses
> Feature Feature Feature
> Feature name used installed needed Expiry
> scale-subscriber 0 10 0 permanent
> scale-l2tp 0 1000 0 permanent
> bgp 1 0 1 invalid
> l3static 1 0 1 invalid
> ospf 1 0 1 invalid
>
> Licenses installed: none
>
>
> admin@router> show chassis hardware
> Hardware inventory:
> Item Version Part number Serial number Description
> Chassis XXXXX JNP204 [MX204]
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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!HM7gEF_z7P4gJFLCXZHpeRSYZS1CilX2JR5jkx3QzaipAcvbCUR0ST_5k7ofKmP_QjyeiPn4zEkATeJtAPcPNDDDEeJKigAR$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HM7gEF_z7P4gJFLCXZHpeRSYZS1CilX2JR5jkx3QzaipAcvbCUR0ST_5k7ofKmP_QjyeiPn4zEkATeJtAPcPNDDDEeJKigAR$>
>


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

On 10/01/2024 18:50, Richard McGovern wrote:
> So basically without some Feature License tied the HW SN via some Flex
> Feature License, it is a good boat anchor!

So why does the MX204 I currently have and doesn't have any license
installed on it is running BGP/OSPF without any problems on version
22.3R3.8? If I lookup the SN on the Juniper website [1] I see "MX204".
If I lookup other SN from "MX204-HW-BASE" I do see "MX204-HW-BASE"
instead of "MX204".

So I guess "MX204" doesn't enforce the license?

I guess another option is not to go above version 22.2R1?

[1] https://entitlementsearch.juniper.net/


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

Ah, I forgot that point. None of the features should be ?hard? enforced, no matter what SW release you are running. You should receive many error/warning messages regarding using a feature for which you do not have a license ? ?soft? enforcement we call it. So no feature should not be able to be configured or used because of lack of a license. If a license is needed for testing, reach out to your Juniper SE or go through Partner to get a temp license.

Juniper protects against user using features they did not actually pay for via EULA ? End User License Agreement - https://webdownload.juniper.net/swdl/dl/secure/site/1/record/167857.html?pf=QFX5120-32C

A ?MX204? hardware and SKU knew nothing about Flex license. That model was pre-Flex. That model had no licenses if my memory is right ? full Junos which was changed at $10K ? very good deal I might add!!. That model (IC bus name) thinks differently than model with name MX204-HW-Base or MX204-HWBASE-AC-FS (FS = Flex Software maybe????). Both of these models know about Flex and the requirement match of feature being used and license installed.

Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either) there could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW release ? RN should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper internal have discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the years, and with potential change in product management (just happens) that view may change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.

Hopefully this helps, and explains a little of the history of how MX got to where it is today, and beyond.

Rich

Richard McGovern
Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
978-618-3342

I?d rather be lucky than good, as I know I am not good
I don?t make the news, I just report it




Juniper Business Use Only
From: chiel <chiel@gmx.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 4:13 PM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>, Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
[External Email. Be cautious of content]


On 10/01/2024 18:50, Richard McGovern wrote:
> So basically without some Feature License tied the HW SN via some Flex
> Feature License, it is a good boat anchor!

So why does the MX204 I currently have and doesn't have any license
installed on it is running BGP/OSPF without any problems on version
22.3R3.8? If I lookup the SN on the Juniper website [1] I see "MX204".
If I lookup other SN from "MX204-HW-BASE" I do see "MX204-HW-BASE"
instead of "MX204".

So I guess "MX204" doesn't enforce the license?

I guess another option is not to go above version 22.2R1?

[1] https://entitlementsearch.juniper.net/

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

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 09:41:41PM +0000, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
> Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either)
> there could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW
> release ? RN should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper
> internal have discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the
> years, and with potential change in product management (just happens)
> that view may change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.

If you do not have enough magenta coloured ink, no BGP for you...

gert
--
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de

Good evening guys, how are you ?

If I can contribute a little.

Looking from a timeline standpoint... the MX204 passed:

- MX204 with -IR and R licenses ( which were perpetual )

- MX204-P-BASE ( Which was the transition box from -IR and -R to Flex License )

- MX204-HW-BASE ( Advanced and Premium Flex Licenses with 3 years or Perpetual )

Now on the JUNOS 22, Juniper starts requesting that the licenses hashes be installed in the box. However, from my point of view, the portal for generating router licenses is not yet prepared to take an -IR or -R license and generate it in the way that version 22 understands.

For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to enforce the table's software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate an old MX480 or MX204 license for the new standard that JUNIPER is requiring in the JUNOS 22...

I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.

At.te

Giuliano

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering via juniper-nsp
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 6:46 PM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 09:41:41PM +0000, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
> Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either) there
> could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW release ? RN
> should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper internal have
> discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the years, and with
> potential change in product management (just happens) that view may
> change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.

If you do not have enough magenta coloured ink, no BGP for you...

gert
--
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de

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

Agree sort of. The SW should know if model was MX204 or MX204-P-BASE/ MX204-HW-BASE. So it should know if need to enforce a license or not. The problem is that some MX204-P-BASE were sold as -IR or -R, etc. and some sold with Flex ? Transition period.

There is no way for SW to know by which method a MX204-P-BASE was sold. So no way to know to enforce or not. That is one reason for ?soft? enforcement. Customer (and Juniper Sales) can then determine which method was used, and get the customer a valid perpetual license at $0 so customer is good to go forever.

Now whether this approach is actually occurring, I don?t know. I service my customer base like above on an as needed basis.

FYI only, Rich

Richard McGovern
Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
978-618-3342

I?d rather be lucky than good, as I know I am not good
I don?t make the news, I just report it




Juniper Business Use Only
From: Giuliano C. Medalha <giuliano@wztech.com.br>
Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 4:49 PM
To: Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de>, Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
[External Email. Be cautious of content]


Good evening guys, how are you ?

If I can contribute a little.

Looking from a timeline standpoint... the MX204 passed:

- MX204 with -IR and R licenses ( which were perpetual )

- MX204-P-BASE ( Which was the transition box from -IR and -R to Flex License )

- MX204-HW-BASE ( Advanced and Premium Flex Licenses with 3 years or Perpetual )

Now on the JUNOS 22, Juniper starts requesting that the licenses hashes be installed in the box. However, from my point of view, the portal for generating router licenses is not yet prepared to take an -IR or -R license and generate it in the way that version 22 understands.

For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to enforce the table's software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate an old MX480 or MX204 license for the new standard that JUNIPER is requiring in the JUNOS 22...

I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.

At.te

Giuliano

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering via juniper-nsp
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 6:46 PM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 09:41:41PM +0000, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
> Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either) there
> could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW release ? RN
> should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper internal have
> discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the years, and with
> potential change in product management (just happens) that view may
> change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.

If you do not have enough magenta coloured ink, no BGP for you...

gert
--
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de

WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
Copyright ? 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

Good Evening,

>>> For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to >>>enforce the table's software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate an old MX480 or MX204 license >>> for the new standard that JUNIPER is requiring in the JUNOS 22...

>>> I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.

Unless they EOL the entire lot and therefore the problem is gone. ????. Computer says no ????.



Catalin Dominte

From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of Giuliano C. Medalha via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Date: Wednesday, 10 January 2024 at 21:50
To: Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de>, Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
Good evening guys, how are you ?

If I can contribute a little.

Looking from a timeline standpoint... the MX204 passed:

- MX204 with -IR and R licenses ( which were perpetual )

- MX204-P-BASE ( Which was the transition box from -IR and -R to Flex License )

- MX204-HW-BASE ( Advanced and Premium Flex Licenses with 3 years or Perpetual )

Now on the JUNOS 22, Juniper starts requesting that the licenses hashes be installed in the box. However, from my point of view, the portal for generating router licenses is not yet prepared to take an -IR or -R license and generate it in the way that version 22 understands.

For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to enforce the table's software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate an old MX480 or MX204 license for the new standard that JUNIPER is requiring in the JUNOS 22...

I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.

At.te

Giuliano

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering via juniper-nsp
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 6:46 PM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 09:41:41PM +0000, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
> Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either) there
> could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW release ? RN
> should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper internal have
> discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the years, and with
> potential change in product management (just happens) that view may
> change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.

If you do not have enough magenta coloured ink, no BGP for you...

gert
--
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de

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

Goodnight

As far as I saw, the MX480 and MPC7 are not in EOL.

However, even if it is, and the customer has an active COR or ND type contract, the customer has the right to install recent versions of JUNOS (obviously as long as they are supported by the platform), such as 22.

If 22 complains to the customer about license, the ideal would be to have a way to generate this HASH by the juniper license portal.

Otherwise, every time a commit is made, a WARNING comes and that is very annoying.

The installed base of MX480 and MPC7 with active support is still very high in the world.

At.te

Giuliano

From: Catalin Dominte <catalin.dominte@nocsult.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:26 PM
To: Giuliano C. Medalha <giuliano@wztech.com.br>; Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de>; Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?

Good Evening,

>>> For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to >>>enforce the table's software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate an old MX480 or MX204 license >>> for the new standard that JUNIPER is requiring in the JUNOS 22...

>>> I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.

Unless they EOL the entire lot and therefore the problem is gone. ????. Computer says no ????.



Catalin Dominte

From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net>> on behalf of Giuliano C. Medalha via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
Date: Wednesday, 10 January 2024 at 21:50
To: Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de<mailto:gert@greenie.muc.de>>, Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net<mailto:rmcgovern@juniper.net>>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
Good evening guys, how are you ?

If I can contribute a little.

Looking from a timeline standpoint... the MX204 passed:

- MX204 with -IR and R licenses ( which were perpetual )

- MX204-P-BASE ( Which was the transition box from -IR and -R to Flex License )

- MX204-HW-BASE ( Advanced and Premium Flex Licenses with 3 years or Perpetual )

Now on the JUNOS 22, Juniper starts requesting that the licenses hashes be installed in the box. However, from my point of view, the portal for generating router licenses is not yet prepared to take an -IR or -R license and generate it in the way that version 22 understands.

For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to enforce the table's software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate an old MX480 or MX204 license for the new standard that JUNIPER is requiring in the JUNOS 22...

I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.

At.te

Giuliano

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Gert Doering via juniper-nsp
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 6:46 PM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net<mailto:rmcgovern@juniper.net>>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 09:41:41PM +0000, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:
> Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either) there
> could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW release ? RN
> should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper internal have
> discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the years, and with
> potential change in product management (just happens) that view may
> change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.

If you do not have enough magenta coloured ink, no BGP for you...

gert
--
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de<mailto:gert@greenie.muc.de>

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<mailto: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

On 1/10/24 19:50, Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp wrote:

> The “difference” is that either SKU above does not contain a [Flex] Feature License. Some Feature License, Adv or Prem, at some term (years or perpetual) must now be included if you want any MX to do any L3 or above features. So basically without some Feature License tied the HW SN via some Flex Feature License, it is a good boat anchor!
>
> For information on Flex Licenses go here - https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/license/juniper-licensing-user-guide/topics/concept/licenses-for-juniper-software.html
>
> This change in how MX and other Juniper products has been driven by Stock Analysist and other vendors. “I don’t make the news, I just report it”

I can believe this.

If other vendors are dumping honor-based or perpetual licenses, it would
be commercially silly to not follow suit.

Kind of like what Broadcom have done since picking up VMware, and
telling customers to move to subscription-based billing in lieu of
perpetual licenses.

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

On 10/01/2024 22:41, Richard McGovern wrote:
> Hopefully this helps, and explains a little of the history of how MX
> got to where it is today, and beyond.

Thanks for the insight! this helps :)

As I only need it for spare I will probably just go for the
MX204-HW-BASE and ignore the warning messages if I ever need to use it.
Good to know that its not (yet) enforced.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Hopefully not enforced!! Just FYI, but one of the advantages of Flex SW License scheme is ability to move license from one SN to another. In License Portal you ?should? be able to revoke an applied Flex license and then apply that Flex license to another SN. You should then me removing the license from the revoked device.

Now as to whether this actually works, especially in all cases, I do not know.

Regards, Rich

Richard McGovern
Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
978-618-3342

I?d rather be lucky than good, as I know I am not good
I don?t make the news, I just report it




Juniper Business Use Only
From: chiel <chiel@gmx.net>
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2024 at 8:14 AM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>, Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc>
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
[External Email. Be cautious of content]

On 10/01/2024 22:41, Richard McGovern wrote:
Hopefully this helps, and explains a little of the history of how MX got to where it is today, and beyond.

Thanks for the insight! this helps :)

As I only need it for spare I will probably just go for the MX204-HW-BASE and ignore the warning messages if I ever need to use it. Good to know that its not (yet) enforced.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Richard just reports the news, and at risk of keeping this thread a live, I thought I'd give our real word experiences.

I've upgraded both newer "licensed based" mx204s and perpetual pre-sku-change mx204's to 22.4. I can attest regardless I had no problems with BGP or anything else. All of my chassis, licensed or not, claim to be missing licenses based on the output of 'show system license'. For all of my chassis, there are/were no chassis alarm indicating a problem, nor did I receive any syslogs indicating a missing license.

So calling the enforcement soft seems to be an understatement; I had to go out of my way to find out JunOS things I'm breaking the rules.

We had purchased the activation codes for the licensed based mx204s that I sat on until 22.4, so I went through the Agile licensing portal hoops and applied a license to the ones that "I know" require a license per their new model

The whole process makes me wonder if I made a mistake and we're one step away from being locked out of our network. Not a great experience. I will probably follow Richard's advice and ask our SE what's supposed to happen "show system license" wise to my legacy mx204s.

-Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of
> Richard McGovern via juniper-nsp
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 4:03 PM
> To: EXT - giuliano@wztech.com.br <giuliano@wztech.com.br>; Gert Doering
> <gert@greenie.muc.de>
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>
> Agree sort of. The SW should know if model was MX204 or MX204-P-BASE/
> MX204-HW-BASE. So it should know if need to enforce a license or not. The
> problem is that some MX204-P-BASE were sold as -IR or -R, etc. and some
> sold with Flex - Transition period.
>
> There is no way for SW to know by which method a MX204-P-BASE was sold.
> So no way to know to enforce or not. That is one reason for "soft"
> enforcement. Customer (and Juniper Sales) can then determine which method
> was used, and get the customer a valid perpetual license at $0 so customer is
> good to go forever.
>
> Now whether this approach is actually occurring, I don't know. I service my
> customer base like above on an as needed basis.
>
> FYI only, Rich
>
> Richard McGovern
> Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
> 978-618-3342
>
> I'd rather be lucky than good, as I know I am not good
> I don't make the news, I just report it
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
> From: Giuliano C. Medalha <giuliano@wztech.com.br>
> Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 4:49 PM
> To: Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de>, Richard McGovern
> <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
> Good evening guys, how are you ?
>
> If I can contribute a little.
>
> Looking from a timeline standpoint... the MX204 passed:
>
> - MX204 with -IR and R licenses ( which were perpetual )
>
> - MX204-P-BASE ( Which was the transition box from -IR and -R to Flex License
> )
>
> - MX204-HW-BASE ( Advanced and Premium Flex Licenses with 3 years or
> Perpetual )
>
> Now on the JUNOS 22, Juniper starts requesting that the licenses hashes be
> installed in the box. However, from my point of view, the portal for generating
> router licenses is not yet prepared to take an -IR or -R license and generate it in
> the way that version 22 understands.
>
> For example. If you bought an MX480/MPC7 ago with -IR and -R ... the
> JUNOS 22 will ask you to install the hash of a license to enforce the table's
> software (bgp, gre, etc). However, we still haven't figured out how to generate
> an old MX480 or MX204 license for the new standard that JUNIPER is
> requiring in the JUNOS 22...
>
> I think they forgot about that... somehow... and it will need to be resolved.
>
> At.te
>
> Giuliano
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Gert
> Doering via juniper-nsp
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 6:46 PM
> To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern@juniper.net>
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Difference in "MX204" and "MX204-HW-BASE"?
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 09:41:41PM +0000, Richard McGovern via juniper-
> nsp wrote:
> > Now, unknown to me (they don?t tell SEs any of this info either) there
> > could have been ?hard? enforcement added in some newer SW release ? RN
> > should point this out (stop laughing please!!!). Juniper internal have
> > discussed implementing ?hard? enforcement over the years, and with
> > potential change in product management (just happens) that view may
> > change. Can?t tell you yah or nah on hard enforcement.
>
> If you do not have enough magenta coloured ink, no BGP for you...
>
> gert
> --
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de
>
> WZTECH is registered trademark of WZTECH NETWORKS.
> Copyright ? 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