We evaluated the 204. It met our current needs for port density, but not future. A sweet upgrade path from an 80 or 104 though!
Pay close attention to the port allocations. They’re a slight puzzle: https://apps.juniper.net/home/port-checker/index.html -b > On Nov 8, 2019, at 08:40, Clarke Morledge <chm...@wm.edu> wrote: > > 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. I understand that the eight 10Gig ports have been modified to > allow for 1 Gig transceivers as well, and perhaps that the QSFP ports can > accommodate a pigtail for providing a bunch of 1 Gig connections, if > necessary. > > 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? > > Also, I understand that the MX204 CPU and other resources are a vast > improvement over the MX80, and that the MX204 can handle multiple full > Internet route BGP feeds, just as well as the MX240 REs can, without > compromise in performance. > > The newer VM support inside the RE makes the requirements for an additional > RE less important now, according to my understanding. > > 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. > > Have I made accurate assumptions?? > > > Clarke Morledge > Network Engineering > Information Technology > Jones Hall (Room 18) > 200 Ukrop Way > Williamsburg VA 23187 > William & Mary > _______________________________________________ > 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
