>From my point, EX4200 now has almost all features of cat3750G/cat3750E importance for NSP: ingress policing, stp (incl. pvstp and rapid-stp), lacp, qinq, bpdu tunneling (in 10.x); L3 features: ospf, vrf, limited bgp (with license)...
But in addition to this EX4200 has: - working firewall counters; - junoscripts (incl. event scripts); - vlan translation (in 10.x, not tested by me); - pseudowires (not tested by me); - ipv6 (not sure, not tested by me). And as for me JunOS is better then IOS (commit, rollback, commit confirmed etc.). On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 08:37:15AM -0800, Bill Blackford writes: > There is an interesting thread on the C list right now discussing the > benefits of a l3 switch platform (OP started asking about 3550). > I am budgeting to replace some 3560G and 3750G customer aggregation devices > (OSPF, BGP) with devices that will scale better, have redundant power, can do > service policies both input and output and yes it would be nice if it can > handle V6 in hardware (last point not an issue yet as V4 is all I support at > this time). I am not budgeted for nor do I have environment that requires MX > series or a cat6.5/7.6k in this role. It's gonna have to be fixed switches. > Does the EX4200 support firewall policer that can be applied both input and > output? (equiv to "C" service policy). My tests on a EX3200 9.5R2.7 seem to > indicate that I cannot use a policer on egress. I have no 4200's to test this > with. > It would be nice to see a feature comparison. Not wanting to start a holy war > over vendor preference, but has a discussion comparing these two products > occurred on this list? -- Pavel _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
