On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Mark Tinka <mti...@globaltransit.net>wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford > wrote: > > > I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison. > > The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on > > your supplier should be competitively priced with an > > ASR1002. > > This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the > M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's > offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or > STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a > 20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of > line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c. > The trend is more and more towards Ethernet. Why would one need/want to dump an STM64 into an M7i or equivalent Cisco? If one were to need a large pipe filtering device (which I assume is what you are eluding to), I would assume that Juniper's response will be (will, as in future) an SRX with 10GE/STM64 SFP+/XFP optics. My point is that the M7i/M10i are old and while they still have a play in certain applications, there are newer boxes better suited to high throughput, processor intensive tasks. Back to the OP, I would never bring up a software-based router in such a scenario as you described. > > We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an > M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or > medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble > since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports - > lovely. > > The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this > space, anymore. This needs to be rectified. > > Cheers, > > Mark. > > _______________________________________________ > 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