On 25/Mar/16 01:57, Matthew Crocker wrote:
> > Hello, > > What is the current best practice for carrying full tables in MX series > routers? I have 3 new MX480s coming soon and will use them to rebuild my > core network (currently a mix of MX240 & MX80 routers). MPC-NG (w/ 20x1g & > 10x10g MICS )& RE-S-X6-64G-BB. If you're going for that many 10Gbps ports, consider 100Gbps instead; although I'm not sure what your requirements for that would be. > > I’m running MPLS now and have full tables in the default route instance. > Does it make more sense (i.e. more secure core) to run full tables in a > separate virtual-router? I’ve been doing this small ISP thing for 20+ years, > Cisco before, Juniper now, I’ve always bashed my way through. You'll get varying views on carrying the full table in a VRF or logical system. I find not doing this to be simple, but others on this list feel the reverse. It's up to you. > > Looking for a book, NANOG presentation or guide on what is current best > practice with state of the art gear. > > MPLS? BGP? IS-IS? LDP? etc. Yes, all of those would be good. Since you already have an MPLS network, keep it. IS-IS is a great IGP. Definitely recommend it. LDP is a simple way to distribute labels. But think about SR and SPRING for the future as well. Mark. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
