On 8 October 2015 at 18:33, Colton Conor <colton.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You seem to be very familiar with the major routing vendors implementations > on SMP. Do you consider the lack of SMP support on Juniper a reason not to > go with Juniper until implemented. Particularly interested to hear about > JunOS vs TimOS. No, definitely not. If it works for your application, how it works it's not super important. On average I've been more successful on inferior architecture like JunOS compared to superior architecture like IOS-XR. In the end, implementation is so much more determining factor than design. I don't run TimOS myself, but when I talk to people running non-trivial size TimOS networks they seem to be very happy about the software quality. The control-plane of TimOS raises some concerns to me, as the OS is forked version of vxWorks, with no sync to either direction, so essentially ALU's own operating system for all practical purposes, the SMP in TimOS predates SMP in vxWorks. CSCO and JNPR get new control-plane HW support for free, while ALU clearly needs to write code for that. TimOS has been able to distribute work from BGP to many cores, as far as I know all other vendors will only ever use one core for BGP at given time. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp