I'm fairly new to ELS, but that is the way Juniper is going and I need a point in the right direction here.
I have an EX2300-C I need to set up with private port isolation or private VLANs to a primary vlan. Basically so broadcasts on systems on port A don't hit systems port B.
Following the chain of documentation it first sent me here:
except many commands listed including 'no-local-switching' and 'primary-vlan' were depricieted.
When going specifically for ELS software I ended up here
But on step 4 there 'private-vlan' and commands behind that aren't available.
Does this need the EFL license even though it doesn't appear to say it is needed? Is there something else I'm missing or can someone point me in the right direction before I try to open a ticket with Juniper?
At the moment private-vlans are not supported on the EX2300 platform.
I haven't seen any roadmap info regarding this feature so you will need to get in touch with your partner or Juniper account manager if this is a much needed feature.
Thank you. That seems fairly odd that a feature available on every most other EX switches, including the EX2300 predesesser, the EX2200, is not available on the EX2300. What's more worrisome is that same page says the EX2300-C doesn't support Q-in-Q. If that's the case they are pretty much papperweights as an endpoint device for me.
Brief followup after a ticket opened. the EX2300/EX2300C do not support private VLANs as stated before. They do support dot1q even though it isn't listed on the protocol sheet.
I agree, the EX2300 is a bit too limited compared to previous platforms. I also find it quite strange to go this way.
On comment regarding dot1q and q-in-q. That's not the same 🙂 dot1q is trunking of vlans with one tag, q-in-q is multiple tags on the packets. As I remember the chipset used in EX2300 does not support Q-in-Q so it will not be a feature added later on.
Look at a picture of the EX2300-C, and then look at a picture of the SRX300. Made for each other . . .
They effectively have the same physical design down to the corner pieces that appear to facilitate physical stacking (maintaining an airgap) outside a rack. Recall these are both fanless units, and promoted as well suited to working together in a branch situation.
Now check the physical measurements, how is one to arrange a SRX (12.63 x 1.37 x 7.52) atop a EX (10.98 x 1.72 x 9.4) or vice-versa? There is no way that the corners are going to align, unless the EX has a cut out that allows it to overhang the SRX at the rear, which I can't see, in pictures.
However, given the recent improvements in how the SRX300 may be configured, and the relative age differences between it and the EX2300, one can only hope similarly enhanced capabilities are brought to the switch as well (real soon now). Just because branches are small it does not mean that they do not have sophisticated requirements.