Hello,
Hey Paschal,
I’ve had this same issue previously with some geolocation DBs not reflecting locations correctly. I managed to fix the issue by maintaining a public RFC8805 geofeed and submitting it to the various DB providers via email and allowing them to poll it frequently for any updates. Here are a majority of the emails you would need to contact with your published geofeed, if you choose to implement one:
- support@db-ip.com
- support@ip2location.com
- support@ipgeolocation.io
- correction@maxmind.com
- ip-data@digitalenvoy.net
- ipintel@support.neustar
- privacy@ipapi.co
- support@bigdatacloud.com
Feel free to use the following template using the subject of “Geofeed for ” which I successfully used to have the above providers update their databases (with a majority of updates published within a week or so):
Hello,
Please use this geofeed for our IPs going forward.
<Link_to_published_geofeed>
Thanks.
Hope this information helps accomplish what you need!
Regards,
Peter
Has anyone here actually been granted a vMX trial to demo the thing? Their page makes it seem dead simple (vMX Trial Download | Juniper Networks) - just request an account and/or trial and you're off to the races with a 60 day temp license. I've had two customers now asking me if vMX would be a fit for them and my honest answer is I have no clue, because I've been completely ignored by Juniper the two times I've tried to trial the thing.
Spoke to two different colleagues within the past ~6mo who had the exact same experience - sent in a trial request, zero response, not even a denial. I suppose Juniper isn't interested in selling these any longer? It's not like we're signing up with hotmail accounts either, myself and my colleagues have used our business emails that pull up as admin/PoCs on 4 or 5 unique ASNs. I'm not sure what more Juniper wants, but I can find reports of the same behavior from Juniper going back 6 years regarding vMX trials:
https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-April/085229.html
https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-April/085231.html
I've been denigrated to downloading some ancient eval version from a stranger's google drive I found in a search result, not much of it is matching up with Juniper's current documentation, but I suppose this is the experience they prefer potential customers to have 
The last time I worked with vMX was several years ago. The image was outdated to the point of having to fire up an older version of VMWare to export the two VMs so I could import them back into 6. The documentation barely existed. I had to figure out which vmware adapters corresponded to which vMX adapters. No one really seemed to be able to help at Juniper, even though we ended up licensing the things so we were "real" customers of this product.
It looked a lot lot an abandoned project. So unless something has changed in the last few years it's not looking good.
It looked a lot lot an abandoned project. So unless something has
changed in the last few years it’s not looking good.
It’s absolutely not abandoned. There have been vMX images up for download for every mainline Junos revision since at least 18.2 that I can recall. The documentation can be sparse at times, but didn’t seem to take much effort to figure it out.
Matt Harris
Infrastructure Lead
816‑256‑5446
Direct
Looking for help?
We build customized end‑to‑end technology solutions powered by NetFire Cloud.
Jon,
Contact me off list with your business email and I’ll look into it.
cRPD is a pretty nifty product as well. Some interesting little tricks you can do with that.
(Although I don’t think they free trial that, those licenses are quite reasonable as well. )
+1 for cRPD
Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 01:29:41PM -0500, Matt Harris:
> The last time I worked with vMX was several years ago. The image was
> outdated to the point of having to fire up an older version of VMWare to
> export the two VMs so I could import them back into 6. The
> documentation barely existed. I had to figure out which vmware adapters
> corresponded to which vMX adapters. No one really seemed to be able to
> help at Juniper, even though we ended up licensing the things so we were
> "real" customers of this product.
>
> It looked a lot lot an abandoned project. So unless something has
> changed in the last few years it's not looking good.
>Interesting. I haven't had an opportunity to try vMX because of its lack of
Hyper-V support, but we do run vSRX in production quite a bit including
junos versions from 17.x up to 21.x. It's kind of janky on Hyper-V but
works overall (the main issue being very very long boot times - 15+ minutes
to get up and running), but we also run it on KVM on Linux with the "vSRX3"
images, and that works a lot better. The vSRX3 images on KVM, I personally
haven't run into any issues with. The licensing costs are pretty
reasonable, too, imho.Good luck with what you're trying to accomplish: maybe give the vSRX series
a shot if you're running on KVM.
vMX has not been abandoned; latest I have is 20.2B1, obviously not the
current relaease. It works well on esxi, though I am not sure if this is
officially supported yet, and is no longer slow to boot or sync with the
vfpc.
afaiu, vfpc adapters are mgmt, vRE/vfpc internal, intf1 ...
vRE adapaters are mgmt, vRE/vfpx internal.
vSRX is a different animal, afaik.
Contact your sales rep for eval license if the webform isnt working.