> -----Original Message----- > From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp- > boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Riccardo S > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 9:36 AM > To: je...@atlantech.net > Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper equivalent to Cisco 3800X > > Hi Eric > I guess 3750X could be an option. > > By the way the use needed by this machine is a ethernet customer > aggregator (hence many eth ports) with the need of BGP/PIM sessions > for mcast redistribution from the core (hence needs of BGP/PIM but no > MPLS). > > I know EX4200 can support up to 128 BGP sessions, no matter about > routing table dimension since is less than 1k. > > Do you know how many BGP peers are supported by 3750X ? >
Unfortunately, I do not. There may be other differences between the two which is why they were pushing the ME3800X, such as buffer space or other QoS related differences. Perhaps it was a positioning issue, but if that's the case, why not the ME3600X? Given just the birds eye view of what you need, it sounds like the ME3600X, ME3800X, EX3200, and EX4200 would all work and it really depends on the more specific features and functions you would need, as well as your budget. -evt _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
