Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On (2008-01-31 11:36 -0200), Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote: > A good price reference would be the Cisco ME6524, which has a US$12k > street price. What are the current street price estimates on Juniper > EX3200-24T with a 4 GbE uplink module ? I have disagree, there isn't comparable cisco product. This falls between ME6524 and 3560/3750. ME6524 is not fair comparison (to 1U EX's), because of it's considerably larger FIB and more full-blow MPLS support. Price-wise 3560/3750 are close, while arguably less useful than EX in SP applications due to lack of MPLS and IS-IS. I hope that some arms race between csco and jnpr happens on account of EX's in 1U 'switch' portfolios. -- ++ytti ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
> Again - Juniper's main focus for this switch is the enterprise. They're > trying to get some of that sweet, sweet Cisco territory that they've > been so hungry for since purchasing Netscreen. Depending on the > popularity of these switches, I wouldn't be surprised if they made a > more formal entry into stackable carrier ethernet switching. They gotta > bring that per-port cost down, though, if they want to even think about > penetrating the SP access edge market. The MPLS support on the EX series (even if not available at FCS) suggests that some SP adoption is planned or desired. Most Carrier Ethernet features are control plane ones, so it's only a matter of putting development resources into it... they might choose not do it. A good price reference would be the Cisco ME6524, which has a US$12k street price. What are the current street price estimates on Juniper EX3200-24T with a 4 GbE uplink module ? Rubens ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
I wonder if that's because they're not trying to make an 'everything' package on their first stab in the marketplace. It sounds like they submitted a decent first attempt at the switching space and will wait to see what shakes out, and what people will say (as per your suggestion) what works and doesn't work for them. I'm not saying XFP won't enter the product line, but perhaps it will only be in some of the later versions of their products and not others. I think it wouldn't be the wisest move for them to have the "feature-killer" switch on their first attempt (with things like 1mil routes, full MPLS/VPLS, metro features, XFP, etc.), but instead see where the market takes what appears to be a decent (if not imperfect) product. I guess that's why the POE feature set kind of confused me- it strikes me as a significant feature to add with limited use in a datacenter. Personally, I'm excited. Already I view the low-end 3200 in many spaces of our network, as both switch and router (despite the 12k limitation- I don't think we have more than 1k OSPF routes right now anyway.) And the best part is that (given its performance) I can now suggest to management that we can go with one vendor for most of the network- before this we were resigned with Juniper for routing, Cisco (or someone else) for switching- now we can look at Juniper throughout the path. Wow does that make life easier for me. danno -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard A Steenbergen Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 5:10 PM To: bill fumerola Cc: Juniper-NSP Mailing list Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:09:07PM -0800, bill fumerola wrote: > so i agree with everything RAS said. per usual. :) Woo. :) BTW, I'd like to point out one additional item which is publicly available information but which generally seems to have been overlooked so far. If you take a close look at the "coming not-very-soon" EX8200 on page 6: http://www.juniper.net/solutions/literature/brochures/150057.pdf You'll notice 8 distinct 10G ports per blade. At first glance one might be tempted to believe they are XFP ports, but those are SFP+ ports. Why is this a problem? Because SFP+ achieve their density not by significantly reducing power draw, but by eliminating the higher end power classes which are necessary to drive medium and long reach optics (40km ER, 80km ZR, any DWDM tuned optics, etc). There is a thread on exactly why this sucks so bad over on cisco-nsp, but the bottom line is that if you have an SFP+ product you will NEVER be able to do long reach optics (let alone at the very reasonable prices or 40-channel DWDM frequencies available in commodity XFP today). I'm personally baffled by Juniper's decision here, it's not like they even need SFP+ to achieve the density required. On the Cisco Nexus 32-port 10G SFP+ blade (which also does FC), or the 48-port 10G SFP+ 1U Arastra box, there is a legitmate excuse for using SFP+ at the expense of long reach optics, but on the Juniper 8-port full-sized blade there is absolutely no reason Juniper should not be using XFP here. I would encourage anyone who is interested in this product and who might ever want to use long-reach optics in it to talk to their account team about XFP instead of SFP+ blades NOW before this horribly bad idea progresses any further. -- Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC) ___ 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:09:07PM -0800, bill fumerola wrote: > so i agree with everything RAS said. per usual. :) Woo. :) BTW, I'd like to point out one additional item which is publicly available information but which generally seems to have been overlooked so far. If you take a close look at the "coming not-very-soon" EX8200 on page 6: http://www.juniper.net/solutions/literature/brochures/150057.pdf You'll notice 8 distinct 10G ports per blade. At first glance one might be tempted to believe they are XFP ports, but those are SFP+ ports. Why is this a problem? Because SFP+ achieve their density not by significantly reducing power draw, but by eliminating the higher end power classes which are necessary to drive medium and long reach optics (40km ER, 80km ZR, any DWDM tuned optics, etc). There is a thread on exactly why this sucks so bad over on cisco-nsp, but the bottom line is that if you have an SFP+ product you will NEVER be able to do long reach optics (let alone at the very reasonable prices or 40-channel DWDM frequencies available in commodity XFP today). I'm personally baffled by Juniper's decision here, it's not like they even need SFP+ to achieve the density required. On the Cisco Nexus 32-port 10G SFP+ blade (which also does FC), or the 48-port 10G SFP+ 1U Arastra box, there is a legitmate excuse for using SFP+ at the expense of long reach optics, but on the Juniper 8-port full-sized blade there is absolutely no reason Juniper should not be using XFP here. I would encourage anyone who is interested in this product and who might ever want to use long-reach optics in it to talk to their account team about XFP instead of SFP+ blades NOW before this horribly bad idea progresses any further. -- Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC) ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Rubens Kuhl Jr. > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 4:43 PM > To: Juniper-Nsp > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > Besides the 12k routes limits, the 28k MAC addresses limit is not a > hard one but somewhat less than a comparable ME6500 unit, which > supports 256k routes and 64/96k MACs. > > If the Juniper EX software releases bring some Carrier Ethernet > features, the box could be a strong competitor on the Metro Ethernet > arena. I hope Juniper realises this and put some effort into it. > > > Rubens Again - Juniper's main focus for this switch is the enterprise. They're trying to get some of that sweet, sweet Cisco territory that they've been so hungry for since purchasing Netscreen. Depending on the popularity of these switches, I wouldn't be surprised if they made a more formal entry into stackable carrier ethernet switching. They gotta bring that per-port cost down, though, if they want to even think about penetrating the SP access edge market. -evt ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Besides the 12k routes limits, the 28k MAC addresses limit is not a hard one but somewhat less than a comparable ME6500 unit, which supports 256k routes and 64/96k MACs. If the Juniper EX software releases bring some Carrier Ethernet features, the box could be a strong competitor on the Metro Ethernet arena. I hope Juniper realises this and put some effort into it. Rubens On Jan 29, 2008 12:32 PM, GIULIANO (UOL) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise > Class Switches: > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html > > > ___ > 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 01:48:00PM -0500, Dan Farrell wrote: > Actually he can speak for us on this one, too. I asked my cohort here > what devices we had in our datacenters that would need POE... you know > what I heard? > > ... cricket... is that silence because the POE VOIP phones you use in your NOC aren't getting power? also, i'd look into some pest management. crickets in the colo can't be healthy. :) > I told a vendor rep recently that there is no way we would ever buy POE > switches for our hosting work... and now he's smiling because he knows I > like the sound of Juniper switching. Getting ready to eat my words... just because it has POE doesn't mean you need to use it. you're not paying more for it. they're not drawing the power unless being utilized. i'd imagine you have plenty of devices that you don't use 100% of the features all the time. it's called flexibility. also, would you rather have waited longer (or paid more) so juniper could develop, market, and code for two slightly different hardware platforms? i'd never use RIP in a modern network, yet i still buy routers that are capable of RIP all the time. -- bill ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE Tunnels (>7) > available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. i am enthused about the capabilities, especially when compared with the lack of some of these advanced features in the force10 S-series. bummed about the limit of 12k unicast/2k multicast ipv4 routes. i see no mention of V6 route limitation in the documentation, but i'm still reading through it. with a decent discount, a J6350(w/ BGP license)+EX3200 could make for a nice solution for POPs, peering points, corporate IT datacenters etc. larger networks could deploy the pair to small POPs/remote offices, etc. the top-of-rack (hereafter, 'TOR') aggregation is what i'm looking at them for as well. in the past, i've avoided using TOR switches for L3 routing because of their lack of features, lack of horsepower, or lack of faith. these switches have potential to address one or all of those concerns. while i'm excited, the proof of the pudding is in the forwarding, so to speak. so i agree with everything RAS said. per usual. :) -- bill ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
One of the key uses in our datacenter for PoE is for the array of security cameras we have. PoE to the camera's makes it easier for us to deploy new cameras in places that would be a pain otherwise. Sk. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Farrell Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:48 PM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! Actually he can speak for us on this one, too. I asked my cohort here what devices we had in our datacenters that would need POE... you know what I heard? ... cricket... I told a vendor rep recently that there is no way we would ever buy POE switches for our hosting work... and now he's smiling because he knows I like the sound of Juniper switching. Getting ready to eat my words... dan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Van Tol Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:18 PM To: Rolf Mendelsohn; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Rolf Mendelsohn > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 11:02 AM > To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > Hi Guys, > > Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP > environment wants > that? > > cheers > /rolf > Speak for yourself! There are plenty of reasons why an SP would want PoE, as there are no shortage of devices in an ISP network that might require it. WAPs, Ethernet demarcation devices, media converters, etc. -evt ___ 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 10:01:08AM -0500, Dorian Kim wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 09:41:01AM -0500, Joe Provo wrote: > > It'll be interesting to hear juniper folks compare it to the crisco > > nexus that was announced yesterday/ > > Bit of apples and oranges comparison between the two Obviously the proper comparison here is to the Cisco 3560G/E, the Foundry FESX, and the Extreme Summit x450 product lines. Interestingly, the EX series seems to be priced a fair bit below the comparable Cisco product across the board (typically Juniper seem to price a bit higher than the Cisco version, since their products are generally "better" and can command a higher price), and not much higher than the equivalent Foundry and Extreme products. In theory these boxes may be targeted at Enterprises (well some at any rate, clearly there are a huge percentage who will never be able to grasp non-Cisco, or who depend on Cisco proprietary protocols), but to me it looks more like they're targeted at the datacenter (also going up against Foundry and Extreme) than the enterprise wiring closet. Features like MPLS (for doing VPN PE), and ISIS support should make this box very popular for colo and hosting environments doing switch-per-rack aggregation. I could personally have done with support for a few more than 12k routes (no mention of IPv6/MPLS capacity, hopefully this won't impact IPv4 services), and 4xXFP uplinks to compete with some of the newer and much cheaper Broadcom reference design boxes like the Dell 6224F and Force10 S25P, but generally speaking this looks like a very interesting platform (and the bigger chassis even more so :P). Unfortunately 2 10GE uplinks for a 48-port 1GE box isn't quite good enough any more. The only product Juniper seems to be missing in this lineup is a Nx10G 1U box, going up against the Cisco 3560E-12D 12-port X2 box (recently repriced to $20k list), Force10 S2410 (24-port XFP), Fujitsu XG2000 (20-port XFP), and other similar products. I think if they made a 24-port or even a 12-port XFP 1U box that was stackable, MPLS capable, and perhaps supported a few more routes, it would sell like hotcakes. -- Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC) ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
> This makes it more useful than the Nexus. MPLS = good. If youre looking at using it in an SP environment, yes. But the Nexus isnt targeted at SP environments... ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
This makes it more useful than the Nexus. MPLS = good. Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > >> Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise >> Class Switches: >> >> http://www.juniper.net/index.html >> > > Impressive. Especially footnote about Advanced Feature License: > > AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE Tunnels (>7) > available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. > > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > distribution/access levels... > > PS: if anybody knows, what MPLS features it will support - can you > share it to me ? :) > > ___ > 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Actually he can speak for us on this one, too. I asked my cohort here what devices we had in our datacenters that would need POE... you know what I heard? ... cricket... I told a vendor rep recently that there is no way we would ever buy POE switches for our hosting work... and now he's smiling because he knows I like the sound of Juniper switching. Getting ready to eat my words... dan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Van Tol Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:18 PM To: Rolf Mendelsohn; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Rolf Mendelsohn > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 11:02 AM > To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > Hi Guys, > > Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP > environment wants > that? > > cheers > /rolf > Speak for yourself! There are plenty of reasons why an SP would want PoE, as there are no shortage of devices in an ISP network that might require it. WAPs, Ethernet demarcation devices, media converters, etc. -evt ___ 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
I wonder if the EX4200 can have layer 3 on all ports. A 48 port GigE router would be nice, I just ordered two Cisco 3750G-Es for that exact purpose. I like the stacking capabilities of the EX4200 -Matt On Jan 29, 2008, at 11:57 AM, Scott Morris wrote: > These aren't core... If you're needing to run a full table on every > single > device you have, you may consider a different design strategy! > > Scott > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sabri > Berisha > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:56 AM > To: Alexandre Snarskii > Cc: Juniper-NSP Mailing list > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > > Hi, > >> noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so it >> can >> be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. >> And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet >> distribution/access levels... > > http://www.juniper.net/switch/products.html > > The specs say: > > Layer 3 Features: IPv4 > > Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 > > Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 > > Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 > > Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS > > 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) > > Thanks, > > -- > Sabri > ___ > 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Rolf Mendelsohn > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 11:02 AM > To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > Hi Guys, > > Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP > environment wants > that? > > cheers > /rolf > Speak for yourself! There are plenty of reasons why an SP would want PoE, as there are no shortage of devices in an ISP network that might require it. WAPs, Ethernet demarcation devices, media converters, etc. -evt ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
4 models of 3200s and 5 models of 4200s, some having all POE ports and others having only 1/3 of the ports supporting POE. Doesn't sound unreasonable to me, as they're likely trying to cover a broader customer base. 9 models of wiring-closet switches from a historically router-only vendor sounds like a good first stab to me. In my case (an SP), we'd only ever use the SFP-based models, which naturally don't have POE. David On 29/01/2008, Rolf Mendelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Guys, > > Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP environment wants > that? > > cheers > /rolf > > On Tuesday 29 January 2008 16:47:59 Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > > > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise > > > Class Switches: > > > > > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html > > > > Impressive. Especially footnote about Advanced Feature License: > > > > AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE Tunnels > > (>7) available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. > > > > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > > distribution/access levels... > > > > PS: if anybody knows, what MPLS features it will support - can you > > share it to me ? :) > > > > ___ > > 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 > ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Because these switches are initially targeted at the Enterprise... On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:01 AM, Rolf Mendelsohn wrote: > Hi Guys, > > Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP environment > wants > that? > > cheers > /rolf > > On Tuesday 29 January 2008 16:47:59 Alexandre Snarskii wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: >>> Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise >>> Class Switches: >>> >>> http://www.juniper.net/index.html >> >> Impressive. Especially footnote about Advanced Feature License: >> >> AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE >> Tunnels >> (>7) available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. >> >> noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so >> it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. >> And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet >> distribution/access levels... >> >> PS: if anybody knows, what MPLS features it will support - can you >> share it to me ? :) >> >> ___ >> 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
I'd bet it's an economies of scale thing. Easier to hit the "mass produce" button with one simple flavor. While I haven't seen the details or devices yet, I would be willing to bet that you can turn it off! Scott -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rolf Mendelsohn Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 11:02 AM To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! Hi Guys, Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP environment wants that? cheers /rolf On Tuesday 29 January 2008 16:47:59 Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise Class > > Switches: > > > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html > > Impressive. Especially footnote about Advanced Feature License: > > AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE > Tunnels > (>7) available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. > > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so it can > be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > distribution/access levels... > > PS: if anybody knows, what MPLS features it will support - can you > share it to me ? :) > > ___ > 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
These aren't core... If you're needing to run a full table on every single device you have, you may consider a different design strategy! Scott -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sabri Berisha Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:56 AM To: Alexandre Snarskii Cc: Juniper-NSP Mailing list Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: Hi, > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so it can > be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > distribution/access levels... http://www.juniper.net/switch/products.html The specs say: Layer 3 Features: IPv4 Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) Thanks, -- Sabri ___ 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Sure, but it's in our nature to scream for lower prices while demanding more features, right? :) David On 29/01/2008, Alexandre Snarskii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 04:55:38PM +0100, Sabri Berisha wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > > > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > > > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > > > distribution/access levels... > > > > http://www.juniper.net/switch/products.html > > > > The specs say: > > > > Layer 3 Features: IPv4 > > Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 > > Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 > > Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 > > Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS > > > > 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) > > Yes, this switch will not be able to run full-view. So what ? :) > Most (>98%) of our customers dont need it, and those in need will > have their vlan terminated not on that switch but on some router... > > ___ > 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Hi Guys, Why do they have POE on all models, surely nobody in SP environment wants that? cheers /rolf On Tuesday 29 January 2008 16:47:59 Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise > > Class Switches: > > > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html > > Impressive. Especially footnote about Advanced Feature License: > > AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE Tunnels > (>7) available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. > > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > distribution/access levels... > > PS: if anybody knows, what MPLS features it will support - can you > share it to me ? :) > > ___ > 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
I'll be interested to see how software upgrades go since ISSU isn't fully operational yet (AFAIK). The virtual chassis idea with link agg across ports on different physical chassis provides nice redundancy, but according to the datasheet, if the master switch is upgraded, all other chassis in the virtual chassis are upgraded at the same time, which seems to eliminate the redundancy that the diverse-chassis LAG might have added. I'm not sure I understand the "100BASE-FX support on SFP ports: SX" mentioned in the hardware specs either. At first glance that tells me that you can only use multi-mode 100M optics, but surely that can't be the case (they even mention 1310nm 100M SFP optics near the bottom, which would be SM). Otherwise, pretty slick sounding devices. David On 29/01/2008, Edson Cardoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I guess this product will compete with Extreme Networks, Foundry, Cisco > Catalyst stuff and some others.. > > Edson > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tue 29-Jan-08 13:13 > To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > > > On Tuesday, 29 January 2008, Matt Yaklin wrote: > > > > Did juniper buy out another switching company or is this their > > design from the ground up? > > > Their design, according to our account team. > ___ > 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 > ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 04:55:38PM +0100, Sabri Berisha wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: > > Hi, > > > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > > distribution/access levels... > > http://www.juniper.net/switch/products.html > > The specs say: > > Layer 3 Features: IPv4 > Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 > Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 > Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 > Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS > > 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) Yes, this switch will not be able to run full-view. So what ? :) Most (>98%) of our customers dont need it, and those in need will have their vlan terminated not on that switch but on some router... ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
But we cannot forget the EX-8200 chassis in Q3 2008 (higher capacity ?) A question about the Juniper Switches ... EX can support 48 + 4 ports or the commodity 44 +4 combo ports ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sabri Berisha Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:56 PM To: Alexandre Snarskii Cc: Juniper-NSP Mailing list Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: Hi, > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > distribution/access levels... http://www.juniper.net/switch/products.html The specs say: Layer 3 Features: IPv4 Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) Thanks, -- Sabri ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp __ NOD32 2831 (20080129) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Sabri Berisha > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:56 AM > To: Alexandre Snarskii > Cc: Juniper-NSP Mailing list > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! > > The specs say: > > Layer 3 Features: IPv4 > > Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 > > Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 > > Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 > > Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS > > 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) > > Thanks, > > -- > Sabri Why would customer edge switches servicing the typical voice/data customer require full routes? Out of the hundreds of Ethernet circuits that we've deployed using Cisco ME3400 switches, only 3 customers require full routes - in that case, we multihop them to a peer with full routes. A <1% need for such capacity doesn't justify the cost of a switch/router that can do a full table. Maybe our customer base is different than others, though. That said, none of the metro ethernet stackable switches that I know of (Foundry, Cisco ME-series, Telco Systems, MRV, etc.) have enough TCAM and/or memory to take full routes, so I'm still not sure the point is valid. -evt ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
I guess this product will compete with Extreme Networks, Foundry, Cisco Catalyst stuff and some others.. Edson From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue 29-Jan-08 13:13 To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!! On Tuesday, 29 January 2008, Matt Yaklin wrote: > > Did juniper buy out another switching company or is this their > design from the ground up? Their design, according to our account team. ___ 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:47:59PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote: Hi, > noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so > it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. > And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet > distribution/access levels... http://www.juniper.net/switch/products.html The specs say: Layer 3 Features: IPv4 Max number of ARP entries: 16,000 Max number of IPv4 unicast routes in hardware: 12,000 Max number of IPv4 multicast routes in hardware: 2,000 Routing protocols: RIPv1/v2, OSPF, BGP, ISIS 12k of routes would work 25 years ago for a service provider :) Thanks, -- Sabri ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise > Class Switches: > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html Impressive. Especially footnote about Advanced Feature License: AFL including IPv6 Routing, IS-IS, BGP, MBGP, MPLS, Enhanced GRE Tunnels (>7) available for purchase with JUNOS 9.1 in Q2'08. noting that these 'switches' will be MPLS-able in this year, so it can be used not only as 'enterprise switch', but as SP one. And their EX 4200-24F is always ideally suited for metro ethernet distribution/access levels... PS: if anybody knows, what MPLS features it will support - can you share it to me ? :) ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Hi group ! On the Juniper Website I can read : http://www.juniper.net/switch/pressrelease.html "Juniper also announced the extension of the Juniper Networks Certification Fast Track Program through 2008, and now includes a certification for JUNOS-based switching." Great ! See'ya, Samuel ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Agreed, the MX960 would be a better comparison to the NEXUS, and even that is like comparing Apples and Pears On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:01 AM, Dorian Kim wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 09:41:01AM -0500, Joe Provo wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: >>> Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise >>> Class Switches: >>> >>> http://www.juniper.net/index.html >> >> It'll be interesting to hear juniper folks compare it to the crisco >> nexus that was announced yesterday/ > > Bit of apples and oranges comparison between the two > > -dorian > ___ > 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Juniper developed this switch in house from the ground up. I've been VERY impressed with what I have seen so far out of this product line, including the NDA stuff I've been privy to. On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:57 AM, Matt Yaklin wrote: > > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Joe Provo wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: >>> Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise >>> Class Switches: >>> >>> http://www.juniper.net/index.html >> >> It'll be interesting to hear juniper folks compare it to the crisco >> nexus that was announced yesterday/ >> > > Did juniper buy out another switching company or is this their > design from the ground up? > > matt > >> -- >> RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE >> ___ >> 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 ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tuesday, 29 January 2008, Matt Yaklin wrote: > > Did juniper buy out another switching company or is this their > design from the ground up? Their design, according to our account team. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
> > Did juniper buy out another switching company or is this their > design from the ground up? It is their design from the ground up. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 09:41:01AM -0500, Joe Provo wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise > > Class Switches: > > > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html > > It'll be interesting to hear juniper folks compare it to the crisco > nexus that was announced yesterday/ Bit of apples and oranges comparison between the two -dorian ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Joe Provo wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: >> Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise >> Class Switches: >> >> http://www.juniper.net/index.html > > It'll be interesting to hear juniper folks compare it to the crisco > nexus that was announced yesterday/ > Did juniper buy out another switching company or is this their design from the ground up? matt > -- > RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE > ___ > 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
Re: [j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:32:37PM -0200, GIULIANO (UOL) wrote: > Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise > Class Switches: > > http://www.juniper.net/index.html It'll be interesting to hear juniper folks compare it to the crisco nexus that was announced yesterday/ -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] The Switch is ON !!!
Be welcome to the new Juniper EX-Series Family of Enterprise Class Switches: http://www.juniper.net/index.html ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
