nanog mailing list archives
Re: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:51:32 +0200
On 3/Mar/16 22:38, Tony Wicks wrote:
Um, you do realise that all the major vendors (including that well Known vendor) have people on this list ? Sending a question about taking advantage of said vendors light handed approach to licencing to this list is somewhat less than subtle ?
I think his use of the word "trick" is what triggered your firewall :-). He could easily re-phrase the question as "Is there any risk with running BGP on the QFX5200 with the license warning"? Juniper already know that a lot of operators run their kit this way. Their only recourse is to enforce license limits in software, and we are seeing that with later releases + newer platforms. Mark.
Current thread:
- Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Stanislaw (Mar 03)
- RE: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Tony Wicks (Mar 03)
- Re: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Mark Tinka (Mar 03)
- Re: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Stanislaw Datskevich (Mar 03)
- Re: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Mark Tinka (Mar 03)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Kenneth McRae (Mar 03)
- RE: Juniper QFX5200-32C junos base services license and BGP Tony Wicks (Mar 03)