> Clarke Morledge > Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 4:39 PM > > I wanted to resurrect an old thread about the MX204, from a year and a half > ago: > > https://lists.gt.net/nsp/juniper/64290 > > My understanding is that the MX204 is a 1 RU MPC7, but with a few > modifications. Yup, so be aware of the reboot requirements if you change the layout of the card/mx204
> I understand that the eight 10Gig ports have been modified to > allow for 1 Gig transceivers as well, Yup > and perhaps that the QSFP ports can > accommodate a pigtail for providing a bunch of 1 Gig connections, if > necessary. > Haven't looked so don't know > The 10/40/100 capabilities of the MPC7 look great, but there are few isolated > cases where I need to support legacy 1 gig, and the MX204 can now handle > that. Is this true? > Yup on the 10g for sure, but if you need 1G in volume you can pair it with a simple 1RU switch. > Also, I understand that the MX204 CPU and other resources are a vast > improvement over the MX80, Anything is better than those old CPUs. > and that the MX204 can handle multiple full > Internet route BGP feeds, just as well as the MX240 REs can, without > compromise in performance. > Yup > The newer VM support inside the RE makes the requirements for an > additional RE less important now, according to my understanding. > The short answer is it's complicated. You got to compare the probabilities of different failure scenarios, probabilities of brown failures and see if it's worth spending a significant extra for a resilient RE, ideally you'd just use 204s in pairs if necessary. > So, if you do not need a lot of speeds and feeds, and can live without a > physical backup RE, the MX204 would be a good alternative to a MX240. > If you run the numbers you'll see that the mx240 even with half licensed mpc7 cards has a significantly higher CAPEX&OPEX per revenue port. adam _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp