Is any reason juniper choose the 5 for mx5, 40 for mx40, 480 for mx480? The number is for backplane bandwidth?
Thanks and regards, Xu Hu On 8 Aug, 2012, at 5:30, Doug Hanks <dha...@juniper.net> wrote: > Please note there's also the MX5 through MX40 that can be upgraded via a > license to a full MX80 as well. > > > On 8/7/12 1:56 AM, "Tima Maryin" <timamar...@mail.ru> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> have a look at: >> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/2012-May/023303.html >> >> >> and the whole thread: >> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/2012-April/023068.html >> >> >> They are about mx480 vs ASR9006, but most of stuff still applies. >> >> >> >> On 07.08.2012 10:22, William Jackson wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> Having used the MX80 in a previous position and now being prompted to >>> look at the ASR 9001, I was wondering if any people have operational >>> experience with the ASR9001 platform? >>> Or any thoughts on comparison. >>> >>> These will be used for IPv4/IPv6 eBGP transit and for MPLS L2VPN/VPLS >>> drop offs, thus all the VLAN tagging, rewriting shenanigans!! >>> >>> thanks >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp