Have you considered EX4600? It is like a QFX5100 but with less feature support. I have 2x in an MC-LAG which has been great, but it supports Virtual Chassis too.
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 7:44 AM Giovanni Bellac via juniper-nsp < juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote: > Hi all, > > we have migrated our core (8-10x Racks, BGP default route, LACP to the > ToR, VLAN, L3, nothing fancy) to a VC of 2x 4200-24T with 12.3R12-S9. > 12.3R12-Sx is a recommend version for EX4200. We have had a kernel panic > (no JTAC) and I am not confident with this old setup anymore. > > Our older stack of 2x 4200-24T with 12.3R6.6 has done its job for years > without any problems. > > (PS: We have first migrated to 15.1R7-S1 on the new VC - it was terribly > buggy - Guys, 15.1 is a JTAC recommend version... I have the feeling and of > course reading the mailinglists that Juniper has no inhouse testing anymore > ? Note to me: RTFM(ailinglist) first.) > > So, we want something new with JTAC support. We need (1/10G)-Base-T, VLAN, > L3, nothing fancy, but stable. We have 3k ARP entries. > > Option 1) 2x EX4550 > > Option 2) 2x QFX5100 > > We want to keep simplicity in and therefore want to use VC. We are pushing > some Gbit/s from Rack-to-Rack (backups) and to our two upstreams around > 500-600Mbit/s. > QFX5100 hardware seems to be MUCH better than EX4550 hardware. The ARP > table size, hash table size etc. on EX4550 is relatively small. > I have read (mailinglists, reddit) that VC is not a good idea on QFX5100 > (bugs, bugs, bugs). > > Can somebody with these devices in the network can give me some up to date > insights? > > Thanks in advance! > > Kind regards, > Giovanni > _______________________________________________ > 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
