Anyone have have a ball park figure of what the MS-MIC will cost?
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Ben Dale <bd...@comlinx.com.au> wrote: > MS-MIC is out for the MX5-80: > > http://www.juniper.net/us/en/local/pdf/datasheets/1000454-en.pdf > > doesn't look like there isn't a services port on the back of the 104 > though: > > > http://www.juniper.net/shared/img/products/mx-series/mx104/mx104-rear-high.jpg > > maybe you can use one of the front slots? > > On 13 Nov 2013, at 2:52 pm, Skeeve Stevens < > skeeve+juniper...@eintellegonetworks.com> wrote: > > > Does anyone know how many users the MX104 will be able to handle though? > > > > The 4000 user limit on the MX80 was quite low. > > > > Does the MX104 have the services port on the back like the MX80? I'm > waiting for the CGN Services card which was supposed to be released around > now. > > > > > > ...Skeeve > > > > Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd > > ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com > > Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve > > facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve > > twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com > > > > The Experts Who The Experts Call > > Juniper - Cisco - Cloud > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Ben Dale <bd...@comlinx.com.au> wrote: > > That and I think a lot of the BRAS "migration" functionality (LNS/LAC > etc) was late to the party after being told it wasn't going to happen for > anything lower than the 240. > > > > On 13 Nov 2013, at 12:51 pm, Bill Blackford <bblackf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > My personal feeling is the MX80 wasn't widely adopted as a lower > density > > > subscriber box given the lack of redundant REs. The MX104 may find it's > > > niche as a BRAS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Eric Van Tol <e...@atlantech.net> > wrote: > > > > > >> One thing to keep in mind about these boxes is that, like the > > >> MX5/10/40/80, the built-in 10G ports do not do hierarchical QoS > (per-unit > > >> scheduling). I'm confused as to why this is, considering they are > > >> Trio-based routers, but I digress. I personally don't think that the > > >> astronomical cost to enable the 10G ports on all the low-end MX > routers is > > >> worth it, considering they can't even do per-unit scheduling. > > >> > > >> -evt > > >> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On > > >> Behalf Of > > >>> joel jaeggli > > >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:00 PM > > >>> To: Saku Ytti > > >>> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > > >>> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX104 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Nov 12, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> On (2013-11-12 20:14 +0000), Tom Storey wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Why so much just to enable some ports? How do they come up with > that > > >>>>> kind of price? Pluck it out of thin air? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The hardware has been paid for, and I know thats only list pricing, > > >>>>> but it still seems ridiculous. > > >>>> > > >>>> The question might have been rhetoric. But I'll bite. > > >>>> > > >>>> The BOM on these boxes is nothing, I'm guessing less than 1kUSD. But > > >> the > > >>>> volume you can sell them also is very very small, so the margins > need > > >> to > > >>> be > > >>>> very high to be able to design and support them. > > >>>> Licensing allows you to sell to larger group of people, people who > > >>> normally > > >>>> would buy smaller/inferior box, now can afford it, which in turn > > >> allows > > >>> you > > >>>> to reduce your margins, making you more competitive. > > >>>> > > >>>> I actually like it. I wish vendors like Agilent/Ixia, Spirent would > > >> sell > > >>>> test-kit with some sort of 'per hours used' license. Lot of SPs have > > >> need > > >>> for > > >>>> proper testing kit, but only will need them very irregularly. And > > >> renting > > >>> is > > >>>> always such a chore. It's same thing there, BOM is nothing, but > volume > > >> is > > >>> even > > >>>> lower, so prices are ridiculously high, consequently proper testing > is > > >>> very > > >>>> rarely done by other than telco size SPs. > > >>> > > >>> It's one of those things where you work with account team. if the > > >> commercial > > >>> terms don't work out for most potential buyers, then the product > won't be > > >>> successful and either things will change or they won't. > > >>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> ++ytti > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>> 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 > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Bill Blackford > > > > > > Logged into reality and abusing my sudo privileges..... > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp