On 14/Jan/16 02:07, Colton Conor wrote:
> Well it would be RE-S-2000-4096 running the JTAC Recommended Junos > Software Version Junos 13.3R8 plus the standard (not enhanced SCBs). > > I know more memory and 64 bit is usually better, but how does this > help in Junos? From past threads, we have concluded that Junos is > currently single thread/core in most all situations, and > the RE-S-2000-4096 is faster than the RE in a MX80 and MX104. What > does the more cores and quadruple memory get you in > the RE-S-1800X4-16G that you can not do on a RE-S-2000-4096? > > The use case for this box would be full BGP tables and routing with 4+ > providers on 10G ports, plus a couple of ports to a peering exchange. As others running the RE-S-2000 have confirmed, you can run a recent Junos release on that RE today, which is great. The 64-bit RE gives you more memory to hold more routes, but if you only need 4x full BGP feeds today, the RE-S-2000 should be fine. Naturally, the newer RE will provide longer-term support for later Junos releases (especially with the architectural differences between Junos 15 and anything else before it). But in your case, the RE-S-2000 should be just fine. > I am wondering what features the DPC's lack in this situation. - Lots of QoS limitations on the DPC compared to Trio. - Multicast restrictions on the DPC vs. the Trio. - No support for inline jflow on the DPC. - Differences in Tunnel PIC support on the DPC vs. the Trio (Trio is more flexible). - There may also be differences in Carrier Ethernet capabilities. I think you can get away with the RE-S-2000, but if you can, stay away from the DPC, just for peace of mind. Mark. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp