Juniper WAN Acceleration and WCCP v2

Somewhat off-topic, and perhaps not the right forum anyway, but wccp is part of content networking, isn't it?
Does anyone have experience of integrating Juniper's WX/WXC products with WCCP ver 2. The reason I ask is that Juniper's documentation says that WCCPv2 is supported, but doesn't seem to give any sense that it really is. Version 2 should support a fault-tolerant configuration where multiple routers operate WCCP with a cluster of caches. According to Cisco IOS documentation, this discovery can be by either of two methods:
1. Static configuration of the cache IP addresses (i.e. unicast), or
2. Multicast advertisement
However, the WX documentation doesn't mention anything about supporting the second (multicast) WCCP discovery method, and doesn't make any explicit reference, either, to supporting multiple statements like
wccp set router-ip-address 10.0.0.100
wccp set router-ip-address 10.0.0.101
to configure the WX to peer WCCP with multiple routers.
Can anyone advise whether (a) there is any undocumented support for WCCPv2 in multicast mode, or (b) whether the explicit definition of multiple unicast WCCP peer routers is supported?
I know this should really be a question to put to Juniper's tech support, but I have no access to it and have been asked by a customer to review a proposal including these products.
Any help greatly appreciated.

I don't think WCCPv2 is supported

Similar Messages

WAN Acceleration Configuration

Hello all,
We have purchased WAAS WAE 674 WAN Accelerator's, and I have a question on placement in our network. I've just recently implemented redundant WAN Lines (DS3's), and now would like to move my WAE674's so that they are accelerating traffic across both WAN lines.
Is this configuration possible with the 2 WAE674's (no inline cards), and WCCP forwarding, and my HQ WAAS controller, or do I have to purchase an additional 2 WAE 674's to accelarate both WAN lines.
Attached is a drawing for what our WAN design network looks like, we are using EIGRP as our routing protocol, and using per destination load sharing, and redistributing our static routes out from our HQ 6509E.
Please let me know if there is more information needed.
Thanks,
Jon

Hi Jon,
Here are the details of GRE and L2 WCCP redirection.
GRE allows datagrams to be encapsulated into IP packets at the WCCP-enabled router and then redirected to a WAE (the transparent proxy server). At this intermediate destination, the datagrams are decapsulated and then handled by the WAAS software. If the request cannot be handled locally, the origin server may be contacted by the associated WAE to complete the request. In doing so, the trip to the origin server appears to the inner datagrams as one hop. The redirected traffic using GRE usually is referred to as GRE tunnel traffic. With GRE, all redirection is handled by the router software.
Layer 2 redirection is accomplished when a WCCP-enabled router or switch takes advantage of internal switching hardware that either partially or fully implements the WCCP traffic interception and redirection functions at Layer 2. This type of redirection is currently supported only with the Catalyst 6500 series switches and Cisco 7200 and 7600 series routers. With Layer 2 redirection, the first redirected traffic packet is handled by the router software. The rest of the traffic is handled by the router hardware. The branch WAE instructs the router or switch to apply a bit mask to certain packet fields, which in turn provides a mask result or index mapped to the branch WAE in the service group in the form of a mask index address table. The redirection process is accelerated in the switching hardware, making Layer 2 redirection more efficient than Layer 3 GRE.
More details here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/waas/waas/v441/configuration/guide/traffic.html
Cisco WAAS Software Release 4.0.13 introduces flexibility when using WCCPv2 as the redirection method. It allows configuration of egress method that increases Cisco WAAS deployment alternatives in cases using WCCP iterception. From Cisco WAAS 4.0.13 onward, the WCCP negotiated return is also supported as the egress method. This method allows the Cisco WAE to be deployed on the same subnet as users or servers and provides better support for preservation of the routing path chosen by the network, because the optimized traffic is returned to the redirecting router. The negotiated return egress method also helps ensure compatibility with asymmetric routing, equal-cost multipath (ECMP) load-balancing, and Hot Standby Router Protocol (HSRP) environments. The return traffic egress method is negotiated based on the WCCPv2 configuration on the router and the egress method configuration on the Cisco WAE.
You will find more information here:
http://www-europe.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/contnetw/ps5680/ps6870/prod_white_paper0900aecd806d976a_ps6474_Products_White_Paper.html
Regards.

WAE and WCCP mismatch

Hello,
I seem to be having a lot of trouble with a very simple implementation. I have 2 routers and a data centre WAE via WCCP. These devices are on the same L2/L3 segment (x.x.x.0/24). The WAN interfaces on the routers are in different networks. The remote WAE is inline. I configured ip wccp 61 redirect in on the LAN interface of each router and ip wccp 62 redirect in on the WAN interface of each router. I get the alarm "WCCP router x.x.x.1(LAN) unusable for service id:61 reason redirection mismatch with router" and "WCCP router x.x.x.1(LAN) unusable for service id:62 reason redirection mismatch with router". For the WAN interfaces I get the alarm they are unreachable for the service ID.
Snadard router config
ip wccp version 2
ip wccp 61
ip wccp 62
int gi0/0
description LAN
ip address x.x.x.1
ip wccp 61 redirect in
int gi0/1
description WAN
ip address y.y.y.1
ip wccp 62 redirect in
Should I only be trapping inbound traffic on the LAN interface ?
The other thing I noticed was these messages from the PIX on the same L2/L3 segment
Dec 20 2011 05:49:52: %PIX-2-106006: Deny inbound UDP from WADMZJA02/2048 to IROUTER1/2048 on interface outside
Dec 20 2011 05:49:52: %PIX-2-106006: Deny inbound UDP from WADMZJA02/2048 to IROUTER2/2048 on interface outside
Dec 20 2011 05:49:52: %PIX-2-106006: Deny inbound UDP from WADMZJA02/2048 to IROUTER1/2048 on interface outside
Dec 20 2011 05:49:52: %PIX-2-106006: Deny inbound UDP from WADMZJA02/2048 to IROUTER2/2048 on interface outside
Access list
access-list outside_access_in extended permit udp host WADMZJA02 host IROUTER1 log notifications
access-list outside_access_in extended permit udp host WADMZJA02 host IROUTER2 log notifications
access-list outside_access_in extended permit udp host IROUTER1 host WADMZJA02 log notifications
access-list outside_access_in extended permit udp host IROUTER2 host WADMZJA02 log notifications
Best regards
Stephen
WAE config
sh run
2011 Dec 20 07:06:27 WADMZJA02 -admin-shell: %WAAS-PARSER-6-350232: CLI_LOG log_cli_command: sh run
! waas-universal-k9 version 4.3.1 (build b6 Nov 13 2010)
device mode application-accelerator
hostname WADMZJA02
clock timezone Europe/Brussels 1 0
ip domain-name fibe.fortis
primary-interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
ip address x.x.x.248 255.255.255.0
exit
interface GigabitEthernet 2/0
shutdown
exit
ip default-gateway x.x.x.4 <== firewall
no auto-register enable
! ip path-mtu-discovery is disabled in WAAS by default
! <== traffic to be rerouted outbound ==>
ip route a.a.a.0 255.255.255.0 x.x.x.1 <== Outbound HSRP
ip access-list extended HK
permit ip any 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0
exit
logging console enable
logging console priority debug
interception access-list HKWAAS
wccp router-list 1 z.z.z.202 y.y.y.122 x.x.x.1 x.x.x.2 x.x.x.3
wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1 hash-source-ip hash-destination-ip l2-redirect l2-return
wccp version 2
egress-method negotiated-return intercept-method wccp
ip icmp rate-limit unreachable df 0
directed-mode enable
transaction-logs flow enable
--More--
! [K
inetd enable rcp
sshd allow-non-admin-users
sshd enable
tfo tcp optimized-send-buffer 2048
tfo tcp optimized-receive-buffer 2048
accelerator http metadatacache enable
accelerator http metadatacache https enable
accelerator http dre-hints enable
central-manager address x.x.x.247
cms enable
! End of WAAS configuration

Hi Stephen,
The "Redirection mismatch" messages indicate that the redirection or return method configured on the WAE is not compatible with the router. Probably, the routers you are using don't support L2 redirection
Moving forward, I would recommend you to change the line "wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1 hash-source-ip hash-destination-ip l2-redirect l2-return" for "wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1". This will negotiate hash assignment, as well as GRE redirection and return, which are the parameters supported by most platforms.
As for the firewall messages, it seems that some WCCP negotiation packets (UDP port 2048) are being dropped. Unfortunately, my firewall knowledge is very limited, so I cannot really help you with that part.
Regards
Daniel

WAN Accelerator

Hi,
Anyone know if streams will benefit from a wan accelerator?
The accelerator software will optimize "known protocols and ports" will this include Oracle streams ?, with or without configuration?
Any info and/or first hand experience is appreciated
regards Curt

Depends on where the time is being spent.
If 90% of the time is spent on the network transmitting data then: Yes. If 90% is spent reading and writing log files and dealing with application logic: No.
Do you know that the network is the weakest link or are you just shooting at random targets and hoping some arrow sticks?

WAN Acceleration

Hello all. I originally posted this message in the novell.support.native-
file-access forum and it was suggested that I try this forum instead. So
here goes.
We are in the process of evaluating a WAN accelerator solution
from a company named Riverbed. They have an array of WAN accelerator
appliances called Steelhead's. These appliances sit at each WAN location
and actually CACHE the WAN data that is accessed across the wire, thus
giving your WAN a LAN like performance. We have 3 sites connected via T1
lines and are a Civil Engineering firm that at times needs to have multiple
people in multiple offices work on the same projects. We can do this now
with our setup but the file access performance at the remote sites back to
our main office is fairly sluggish. The Steelhead appliances are supposed
to improve this performance dramatically. Spoke to one of their
representitives and they mentioned that another client of theirs also used
NetWare and they simply had to enable CIFS on their servers since NCP
traffic is not accelerated by their devices. I know there is more to the
configuration than that. Has anyone out there had experience configuring
NetWare boxes with these Riverbed Steelhead appliances? Any information
would be appreciated. We are going to be getting some of their reps in
here soon, hopefully they can shed some light on this as far as what kind
of configuration they require from their end. We currently have a total
of 7 NetWare 6.5 SP2 servers spread throughout our 3 locations. We have
not had a need for any other native file access (CIFS, AFP, NFS) since we
are a complete Novell shop. As you may have guessed, NFAP is fairly new
to me, always been a die hard Novell guy. Again, thanks to all for any
information you could provide.
John

Hi
found some interesting links about your subject. I remember that in my
company they werde quite impressed about peribit. So go ahead and compare...
However you have also to consider that theses boxes are not always black
boxes they mostly need some maintenance....
www.allot.com
www.cisco.de
www.expand.com
www.nortelnetworks.com
www.packeteer.com
www.peribit.com
www.telonic.de
Regards
Marc
[email protected] wrote:
> Unfortunately Branch Office doesn't offer bi-directional synchronization
> which is what most people would look for when deploying somthing like this.
> On initial setup id does do bi-directional sync, but that's about it.
>
> The reason we are looking for a solution like this is because it is one of
> the very few solutions that offer this type of functionality. Unfortunately
> these vendors don't offer support for Novell.
>
>
>
>
>>We do have native file access (cifs) and consider going back. NCP has
>>more performance and is more secure. We had abends because of client
>>security upgrades and were even forced to upgrade from 6.0 to 6.5
>>rapidly. I always see a higher risk when implementing a service pack
>>etc. By the way: Why are you going to buy a solution at a vendor with
>>*NO* (not even little) Novell experience. Consider using Novell Branch
>>office if you are a real novell shop.
>>
>>Bill Sappington wrote:
>>
>>>Hey there,
>>>
>>>Enabling Windows native file access is just insane, avoid at all costs.
>>> One of the only major Novell threats came from CIFS, because they of
>>>course implemented MicroSofts protocol exactly, and therefor implemented
>>>their bugs and wholes as well. Now one might ask WHY they did this,
>>>well its because they had to be compatable with a completely exploitable
>>>file access protocol. They fixed the security whole, and I dont * think
>>>* it affected the native access protocol for windows, but in my opinion
>>>windows file access protocols are just not trustable, and well for that
>>>matter, neither is windows.
>>>
>>>Consider BroderManager. It has web caching and all those other goodies,
>>>including compliant fire walls, client VPN, server to server VPN and all
>>>that fun stuff and its priced very reasonably. It also lets you control
>>>who gets to surf, when they get to surf, where they get to surf, etc. etc.
>>>
>>>- Bill
>>>
>>>[email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello all. I originally posted this message in the
>>>>novell.support.native-
>>>>file-access forum and it was suggested that I try this forum instead.
>>>>So here goes.
>>>>
>>>>We are in the process of evaluating a WAN accelerator solution from a
>>>>company named Riverbed. They have an array of WAN accelerator
>>>>appliances called Steelhead's. These appliances sit at each WAN
>>>>location and actually CACHE the WAN data that is accessed across the
>>>>wire, thus giving your WAN a LAN like performance. We have 3 sites
>>>>connected via T1 lines and are a Civil Engineering firm that at times
>>>>needs to have multiple
>>>>people in multiple offices work on the same projects. We can do this
>>>>now with our setup but the file access performance at the remote sites
>>>>back to our main office is fairly sluggish. The Steelhead appliances
>>>>are supposed to improve this performance dramatically. Spoke to one
>>>>of their representitives and they mentioned that another client of
>>>>theirs also used NetWare and they simply had to enable CIFS on their
>>>>servers since NCP traffic is not accelerated by their devices. I know
>>>>there is more to the configuration than that. Has anyone out there
>>>>had experience configuring NetWare boxes with these Riverbed Steelhead
>>>>appliances? Any information would be appreciated. We are going to be
>>>>getting some of their reps in here soon, hopefully they can shed some
>>>>light on this as far as what kind of configuration they require from
>>>>their end. We currently have a total of 7 NetWare 6.5 SP2 servers
>>>>spread throughout our 3 locations. We have not had a need for any
>>>>other native file access (CIFS, AFP, NFS) since we are a complete
>>>>Novell shop. As you may have guessed, NFAP is fairly new to me,
>>>>always been a die hard Novell guy. Again, thanks to all for any
>>>>information you could provide.
>>>>John
>>>>
>>>>
>
>

HT2497 do I connect my airport express to my modem via the WAN port and then connect to my imac via ethernet cable?

Do I connect my airport express to my modem via the WAN port and then connect from airport express to my imac with ethernet cable? Is that how you "hard wire" the connection? Because when I do that, I still can't get online. Thanks.

What is the make & model of your modem?
You pretty much stated the correct wiring. There should be an Ethernet cable connected between the modem and the WAN (circle of dots) port on the AirPort Express base station.
Anytime you change networking hardware it is always a good idea to perform a complete power recycle of that hardware. Check out the following AirPort User Tip for details. Please post back your results.

Is there a difference between the Ethernet WAN port and the other 3 Ethernet Ports on a Time Capsule?

As posted previously, my time capsule will not set up properly because I get an IP address conflict pop up window. Is there a difference between the "Ethernet WAN Port" and the other three ports on the back of the Time Capsule? I may have the DSL modem hooked into the "Ethernet WAN Port". Thanks.

it depends what you want to achieve and what configuration you have on your DSL modem/router.
Resetting TC and run connection wizard from the Airport utility.
Post the problems.

Cant install Toshiba HDD Accelerator and HDD Protection

Hi. I bought a new Satellite L845 SP4105LA one month ago with Windows 8 Single Language pre installed. But since I already got a genuine copy and key for Windows 8 Pro myself, I decided to install that edition. It all went well, I installed all the drivers, but I just cant install the Toshiba HDD Accelerator and HDD Protection. When trying to install HDD Accelerator an error windows appears that reads "Environment not supported (2008)", i tried with several versions of that program but always happens the same. With the HDD Protection, it just unpacks the files and then nothing happens. Is there a way for me to install this utilities? Thank you.

Satellite L845-SP4105LA (PSKF8P-01PAR1)
Windows 8 already has Windows 8 Pro built in. You just need to unlock it.
My advice is to restore the hard disk to its original out-of-the-box contents using Toshiba recovery media, and then upgrade normally to Pro. All the Toshiba utilities will have been properly installed.
Add features: FAQ
-Jerry

Have functional difference with GPU acceleration and software processing of Mercury Playback Engine?

Used Decklink SDI and Premiere CS6 to testing.
I have a question~Have functional difference with GPU acceleration and software processing of Mercury Playback Engine?
(Can GPU acceleration export same used 59.94i external monitor export?).
IN specification，Is it need“software processing”？ whether other restrictions?
If Anyone know please tell me.
thank you.

Thank you for your help, and sorry about didn't make it clear.
Use Decklink SDI and Premiere CS6 to test.
In GPU mode of Mercury Engine, the signal form SDI is 1080i, but even fields will be missing.
Take a simple test:
Make quick slide for reproduce animationin in quadrangle(1080i 29.97), but it can't paly smooth and same gone to 30P.
If in Software mode, the action can be smooth.
Although use Software mode can be ok,but if GPU does not realize,it will take long time to render.
system info:
macpro 10.8.1
premiere cs6.0.2
blackmagic driver 9.6.4
GTX285
sequence of premiere
Presets/blackmagic/8bit YUV/interlace/59.94i
Have any problems with my System or the GPU mode can no external monitor output in 59.94?
IN specification，Is it need“software processing”？ whether other restrictions?
thank you!

Diff between WAN replication and MAN replication

Hi All,
Kinldy tell me differnece between WAN replication and MAN replication in cluster in weblogic server.
Thanks in advance.
Balaji kumar

MAN replication uses in-memory replication to keep the primary and secondary copies of the session
on different clusters. It always attempts to locate the secondary session on the remote cluster.
If connectivity between the data centers is lost, the local cluster will replicate the session within
the cluster. On the first request for the session once inter data center connectivity is restored, WebLogic
Server will relocate the session’s secondary to the remote cluster.
WAN replication uses in-memory replication within the primary cluster and asynchronous
replication via a database to keep a third copy of the session at the remote data center.
The database-backed replication mechanism makes the session data available to the other data center's
cluster should data centerlevel failover occur. The local server buffers its primary session updates in
an in-memory buffer that is periodically flushed. The database-backed replication has two modes of
operation:
- Local cluster periodically flushed the in-memory buffer to its local database. Cross data center
replication is handled externally using some sort of database level replication technology
of your choosing.
- Local cluster uses RMI to push updates periodically from the in-memory buffer to the
remote cluster. The remote cluster writes these updates to its local database.

What SSL accelerator and load-balancer does anyone recommend?

Hi:
I wanted to find out:
Does anyone recommend SSL accelerator cards/boards or SSL accelerator appliances?
What SSL accelerator and load balancer does aynone recommend to help 9iAS?

Ana_Alm wrote:
Hi there!
I just downloaded and installed OS X Lion, and I'm loving it so far.
However, I've seen that Mountain Lion will have some new features when it comes to social apps (what I call the ones that combine twitter, facebook, rss readers and so on).
So, does anyone knows any cools apps for that? I'm currently using Socialite, that combines all those three, but it has a few issues I don't particularly like. Plus, I'm using Adium for a msn client. I'm also thinking about downloading that beta version of "Messages" that will be realeased on Mountain Lion.
So, what do you think? Give me your ideas
Thanks a lot in advance!
As Mountain Lion has not been released to the public yet, then most of us have no idea which companies have updated the development of their Apps for ML. It is in Development phase so any App you try is at your own risk.
Good Luck
Pete

I use Speed bit Video Accelerator and Download Accerlerator Plus (DAP) for my downloads. Is the new version of Firefox capabile yet? a

When I tried to load the latest version of Firefox I received a message telling me that the programs that I use to do down loads from the Internet Speedbit Video Accelerator and Download Accelerator plus (DAP) were not compatible with Firefox yet. Has it been changed?

Thanks for posting edmeister.
All current SPEEDbit products support firefox.
Please visit our download page and get the latest client, here:
SPEEDbit Video Downloader: http://www.speedbit.com/video
Download Accelerator Plus: http://www.speedbit.com/dap
SPEEDbit Video Accelerator: http://speedbit.com/products/video-accelerator

Other traffic at 75% Crushing the optimization, Acceleration and Bandwidth

Other traffic at 75% Crushing the optimization, Acceleration and Bandwidth. Is there a way through the CM to see what the other traffic is? Any thoughts or ideas?

Hi Dan,
You really do not need to create a policy but rather you need application definition. Here are the steps.
Creating an Application Definition
The first step in creating an application policy is to set up an application definition that identifies general information about the application, such as the application name and whether you want the WAAS Central Manager to collect statistics about the application. After creating the application definition, you assign it to a device or device group. You can create up to 255 application definitions on your WAAS system.
The Link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/waas/waas/v441/configuration/guide/policy.html#wp1042389
One the application definition is created for the traffic you want to identify, it will start displaying statistics under the application definition name.
Hope this helps.
Regards.
PS: Please mark this as Answered, if this answers your question.

WAAS and WCCP - looping packet detected

Hi,
Has anyone ran into this senario before. Before anyone answers with "move your WAE off the user subnet", it already has been.
I have wccp 61 redirect in on the user subnet (gig0/0.83 of a dot1q trunk). The WAE is on gig0/1. Before I apply wccp62 to the serial link, I attempt to telnet from a user pc to the router (same subnet, clients default gateway), and the telnet fails. I get a "looping packet detected" on the router console. It shows the source of the packet as the router (wccp router id actually), and the destination ip of the WAE, but the packet came in gig0/1 (interface connected to wae). Obviously the WAE returned the packet to the router (with the original GRE headers, (router as source)). I thought WCCP would understand this as "don't redirect this traffic to me anymore", but the router, actually tries to route it back down gig0/1 and then sees it as a looping packet. I believe the WAE is returning the encapsulated packet to the router to indicate it doesn't want the flow, and the router is attempting to route the GRE packet, instead of realizing it should remove the GRE header and route the internal packet. Router is IOS 12.4(12) as recommended by my Cisco engineer. 2821 router.
For kicks, I continue the WCCP setup on the datatcenter side. As expected, it doesn't work. When I apply the WCCP to the datacenter router (only redirecting lab subnet), the entire lab subnet is unreachable via TCP (but icmp still works as expected).
The WCCP configuration isn't very complex, I can't believe its something I'm doing. I think its a code issue.
Any advise?

no "out" anywhere. The LAB router has a WAE list to only allow redirect to the lab WAE. I don't even need the 62 in on the WAN side, just applying 61 in on the LAN side breaks telnet to the router.
LOOPING PACKET DETECTION:
from router console
Feb 27 14:56:32.924: %IP-3-LOOPPAK: Looping packet detected and dropped -
src=132.242.11.18, dst=153.61.83.70, hl=20, tl=76, prot=47, sport=0, dport=0
in=GigabitEthernet0/1, nexthop=153.61.83.70, out=GigabitEthernet0/1
options=none -Process= "IP Input", ipl= 0, pid= 77 -Traceback= 0x410F6978 0x415CC960 0x415CDC60 0x415BBB38 0x415BCF18 0x415BD27C 0x415BD2FC 0x415BD4E8
Router configuration:
ip wccp 61 redirect-list REDIRECT-WAAS-SUBNETS-61 group-list remote-waas-box
interface Loopback0
ip address 132.242.11.18 255.255.255.255
h323-gateway voip bind srcaddr 132.242.11.18
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.83
description << data vlan 83 >>
encapsulation dot1Q 83
ip address 153.61.83.3 255.255.255.192
ip helper-address 192.127.250.22
ip helper-address 149.25.1.182
no ip proxy-arp
ip wccp 61 redirect in
standby 83 ip 153.61.83.1
standby 83 priority 200
standby 83 preempt
standby 83 track Serial0/1/0:0.99 100
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description << WHQ LAB CE connection >>
ip address 153.61.83.65 255.255.255.192
load-interval 30
duplex full
speed 100
ip access-list standard remote-waas-box
permit 153.61.83.70
ip access-list extended REDIRECT-WAAS-SUBNETS-61
permit ip 153.61.83.0 0.0.0.63 any
WAE configuration:
device mode application-accelerator
primary-interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
ip address 153.61.83.70 255.255.255.192
no autosense
bandwidth 100
full-duplex
exit
wccp router-list 1 153.61.83.65
wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1
wccp version 2
wccp slow-start enable

WAAS and WCCP router selection

Hi
Is there some information about that how much of wccp traffic can be handled by different model of routers?
I'm not looking for throughput report like Process\CEF switching per routers but I would like to see some info about wccp treshold on each models, what's the maximum amount of redirected traffic what the router can handle?
thanks

no "out" anywhere. The LAB router has a WAE list to only allow redirect to the lab WAE. I don't even need the 62 in on the WAN side, just applying 61 in on the LAN side breaks telnet to the router.
LOOPING PACKET DETECTION:
from router console
Feb 27 14:56:32.924: %IP-3-LOOPPAK: Looping packet detected and dropped -
src=132.242.11.18, dst=153.61.83.70, hl=20, tl=76, prot=47, sport=0, dport=0
in=GigabitEthernet0/1, nexthop=153.61.83.70, out=GigabitEthernet0/1
options=none -Process= "IP Input", ipl= 0, pid= 77 -Traceback= 0x410F6978 0x415CC960 0x415CDC60 0x415BBB38 0x415BCF18 0x415BD27C 0x415BD2FC 0x415BD4E8
Router configuration:
ip wccp 61 redirect-list REDIRECT-WAAS-SUBNETS-61 group-list remote-waas-box
interface Loopback0
ip address 132.242.11.18 255.255.255.255
h323-gateway voip bind srcaddr 132.242.11.18
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.83
description << data vlan 83 >>
encapsulation dot1Q 83
ip address 153.61.83.3 255.255.255.192
ip helper-address 192.127.250.22
ip helper-address 149.25.1.182
no ip proxy-arp
ip wccp 61 redirect in
standby 83 ip 153.61.83.1
standby 83 priority 200
standby 83 preempt
standby 83 track Serial0/1/0:0.99 100
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description << WHQ LAB CE connection >>
ip address 153.61.83.65 255.255.255.192
load-interval 30
duplex full
speed 100
ip access-list standard remote-waas-box
permit 153.61.83.70
ip access-list extended REDIRECT-WAAS-SUBNETS-61
permit ip 153.61.83.0 0.0.0.63 any
WAE configuration:
device mode application-accelerator
primary-interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
ip address 153.61.83.70 255.255.255.192
no autosense
bandwidth 100
full-duplex
exit
wccp router-list 1 153.61.83.65
wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1
wccp version 2
wccp slow-start enable

Juniper WAN Acceleration and WCCP v2

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for