On 2019-03-14 13:40 -0400, Andrey Kostin wrote: > Accidentally found that MX series datasheet now mentions MPC-10E with > 400G ports > https://www.juniper.net/assets/us/en/local/pdf/datasheets/1000597-en.pdf [...] > the MPC-10E protects existing investments
Gah, I hate that wording. To me it sounds like "sunk cost fallacy" and "throwing good money after bad"... (I'm not necessarily saying that applies to these cards. It's just that I have heard the words "protect your investment" too many times when it would be much cheaper and better to throw out and replace the old stuff entirely. Seeing that in advertisments thus trigger my bullsh*t klaxons.) > MPC10E-10C > Modular port concentrator with 8xQSPF28 multirate > ports (10/40/100GbE) plus 2xQSFP56-DD multirate > ports (10/40/100/400GbE) > MPC10E-15C > Modular port concentrator with 12xQSPF28 multirate > ports (10/40/100GbE) plus 3xQSFP56-DD multirate > ports (10/40/100/400GbE) It seems these are oversubscribed to the backplane. 8×100G + 2×400G is 1.6 Tbit/s, and 12×100G + 3×400G is 2.4 Tbit/s, but all three of MX240, MX480 and MX960 are listed as having 1.5 Tbit/s max per slot. (And is that 1.5 Tbit/s in *and* out, or is that just 750 Gbit/s per direction?) And nothing for 400G DWDM/coherent, that I can see. I expect service providers would like that, to run 400G on their long distance links without having to have external transponders. For our own use, I'm also hoping for linecards supporting 50G ports (specifically, 50Gbase-LR) soonish. We have two MX480s as our border routers (provided by our ISP) and currently have 100G uplinks to the ISP, and are connecting our datacenter to the MX480s using multiple 10G links to our DC spines. We are kind of hoping to be able to up- grade to 50G connections next year, or possibly the year after that. /Bellman
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp