If you're looking at scaling passed the mx104, I would consider the mx480 chassis. The price delta between the 240 vs. 480 bare chassis is negligible and you'll get more slots to grow into. Especially, if you have a need to do sampling or anything else that may require a service pic. On Dec 5, 2014 9:02 AM, "Graham Johnston" <johnst...@westmancom.com> wrote:
> I am wondering if anyone can provide their real world experience about > sizing Juniper MX routers as it relates to BGP. I am needing a device that > has a mix of layer 2 and 3 features, including MPLS, that will have a very > low port count requirement that will primarily be used at a remote POP site > to connect to the local IX as well as one or two full route transit > providers. The MX104 has what I need from a physical standpoint and a data > plane standpoint, as well as power consumption figures. My only concern is > whether the REs have enough horsepower to churn through the convergence > calculations at a rate that operators in this situation would find > acceptable. I realize that 'acceptable' is a moving target so I would > happily accept feedback from people using them as to how long it takes and > their happiness with the product. > > For those of you that deem the MX104 unacceptable in this kind of role and > moved up to the MX240, what RE did you elect to use? > > Thanks, > Graham Johnston > Network Planner > Westman Communications Group > 204.717.2829 > johnst...@westmancom.com<mailto:johnst...@westmancom.com> > P think green; don't print this email. > >