Re: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Vincent Bernat]

 ❦  7 mai 2021 21:14 GMT, Adam Thompson:

>   * Skip the MX 2k/10k series – they don’t support SFP+ interfaces!
> (“No 10G WDM for you!”) Also no 1G, you need a separate step-down
> switch for that. I don’t know what SP Juniper thinks they’re targeting
> with these.

The 10k can take 10G SFP+ using an adapter. It works fine, but this can
feel like a waste. Something like that:

https://www.fs.com/fr/products/72582.html?attribute=2692=80750

This is seen as a 4x breakout cable.

>   * 1U/2U EX/QFX are reasonable edge devices as long as you’ve
> verified they can do what you need. Not core-router class IMHO.

QFX10k is different from the others. From my experience, it is very
capable and the "Q" versions are quite versatile (many port
configurations, cheap), but Juniper is trying to push the new PTXs with
the same hardware, but not the same price tag, this is a bit confusing.
I don't do MPLS, so I may not see its limitations, but it supports
several full views and is the flagship for BGP EVPN VXLAN implementation
for Juniper.
-- 
The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
-- William Shakespeare, "The Merchant of Venice"

Re: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Alain Hebert]

    Yeah,

Routers for the whole Alphabet Soup.

    MX204, MX960 are pretty much headache free.  Heck even MX240 could 
be a good start if you are on a budget.

    ( Watch for the EoL )


Distribution ( MPLS Alphabet Soup without VXLAN/EVPN )

    QFX5100 made us feel like being full time members of the Juniper QA 
Team.  But once your find ALL the limitation of their chipset, they 
won't fail you.
    ( Chipset limitations are not always handled by the configuration 
and rendered ports unusable until the device is rebooted ... Or make you 
wonder why the heck it ain't working until you find some notes in an 
obscure PR )


    We're going up to 100Gbps (and then 200Gbps) in distribution and 
we're feeling good about the QFX being able to handle it.


    PS: EVPN worked well in the Lab, but we're no using in our "scheme".

-
Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net
PubNIX Inc.
50 boul. St-Charles
P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7
Tel: 514-990-5911  http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443

On 5/7/21 6:56 PM, Mann, Jason via NANOG wrote:
We are using MX204's as our internet routers and I want to replace our 
ASR's with them to be used as an aggregate circuit router. With the 
amount of 10G/40G/100G interface and the price point we have been 
happy with them. The big issue was learning Junos since we are cisco shop



*From:* NANOG  on behalf of 
Javier Gutierrez Guerra 

*Sent:* Friday, May 7, 2021 2:54 PM
*To:* nanog@nanog.org 
*Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Juniper hardware recommendation

Hi,

Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core 
router/switch from Juniper?


MX208,480,10K

Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although 
they do use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) 
but I’m just wondering here what most people use and how good or bad 
of an experience you have with it 


Thanks,

Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email: guer...@westmancom.com 

WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR [westmancom.com] 



cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching

Re: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Mann, Jason via NANOG]

We are using MX204's as our internet routers and I want to replace our ASR's 
with them to be used as an aggregate circuit router. With the amount of 
10G/40G/100G interface and the price point we have been happy with them. The 
big issue was learning Junos since we are cisco shop


From: NANOG  on behalf of Javier 
Gutierrez Guerra 
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 2:54 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Juniper hardware recommendation


Hi,

Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?

MX208,480,10K

Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it 

Thanks,



Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email: guer...@westmancom.com

[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR] 
[westmancom.com]



[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]

Re: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Stephen M]

Side to side airflow can be implemented in a front to rear environment with 
some baffling acting as intake from one side to exhaust out the other

Not ideal, but doable

//please pardon any brevities - sent from mobile//

From: NANOG  on behalf of 
Tony Wicks 
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 2:33:23 PM
To: 'Javier Gutierrez Guerra' 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: RE: Juniper hardware recommendation


You really should discuss this with you local Juniper rep in the first instance 
I would suggest.



From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Javier 
Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Saturday, 8 May 2021 9:28 am
To: r...@rkhtech.org; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Juniper hardware recommendation



I need to do MPLS (vlls), VXLAN, Multicast, full routing tables, multiple VRFs, 
q-in-q, QoS

Anything with 1Tbs of throughput should be more than enough at this time for me

I also need it to be able to support 100G interfaces, 1G and 10G



Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email: guer...@westmancom.com

[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR]



[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]



From: Ryan Hamel mailto:administra...@rkhtech.org>>
Sent: May 7, 2021 4:23 PM
To: Javier Gutierrez Guerra 
mailto:guer...@westmancom.com>>; 
nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Juniper hardware recommendation



CAUTION: This email is from an external source. Do not click links or open 
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello!



We wouldn’t be able to give any sort of answer without knowing your current and 
future requirements. Each model has its own throughput classes, and sometimes a 
full on MX router isn’t required.



From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech@nanog.org>>
 On Behalf Of Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 1:55 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Juniper hardware recommendation



Hi,

Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?

MX208,480,10K

Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it ??

Thanks,



Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email: guer...@westmancom.com

[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR]



[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]

RE: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Tony Wicks]

You really should discuss this with you local Juniper rep in the first instance 
I would suggest.

 

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Javier 
Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Saturday, 8 May 2021 9:28 am
To: r...@rkhtech.org; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Juniper hardware recommendation

 

I need to do MPLS (vlls), VXLAN, Multicast, full routing tables, multiple VRFs, 
q-in-q, QoS

Anything with 1Tbs of throughput should be more than enough at this time for me

I also need it to be able to support 100G interfaces, 1G and 10G  

 

Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email:   guer...@westmancom.com

  

 



 

From: Ryan Hamel mailto:administra...@rkhtech.org> 
> 
Sent: May 7, 2021 4:23 PM
To: Javier Gutierrez Guerra mailto:guer...@westmancom.com> >; nanog@nanog.org  
Subject: RE: Juniper hardware recommendation

 

CAUTION: This email is from an external source. Do not click links or open 
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello!

 

We wouldn’t be able to give any sort of answer without knowing your current and 
future requirements. Each model has its own throughput classes, and sometimes a 
full on MX router isn’t required.

 

From: NANOG mailto:nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech@nanog.org> > On Behalf Of Javier 
Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 1:55 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org  
Subject: Juniper hardware recommendation

 

Hi, 

Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?

MX208,480,10K

Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it 

Thanks,

 

Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email:   guer...@westmancom.com

  

 



 

RE: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Javier Gutierrez Guerra]

I need to do MPLS (vlls), VXLAN, Multicast, full routing tables, multiple VRFs, 
q-in-q, QoS
Anything with 1Tbs of throughput should be more than enough at this time for me
I also need it to be able to support 100G interfaces, 1G and 10G

Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Network Analyst
CCNA R, JNCIA
Westman Communications Group
Phone: 204-717-2827
Email: guer...@westmancom.com
[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR]

[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]

From: Ryan Hamel 
Sent: May 7, 2021 4:23 PM
To: Javier Gutierrez Guerra ; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Juniper hardware recommendation


CAUTION: This email is from an external source. Do not click links or open 
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello!

We wouldn’t be able to give any sort of answer without knowing your current and 
future requirements. Each model has its own throughput classes, and sometimes a 
full on MX router isn’t required.

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech@nanog.org>>
 On Behalf Of Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 1:55 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Juniper hardware recommendation

Hi,
Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?
MX208,480,10K
Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it 
Thanks,

Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Network Analyst
CCNA R, JNCIA
Westman Communications Group
Phone: 204-717-2827
Email: guer...@westmancom.com
[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR]

[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]

RE: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Ryan Hamel]

Hello!

 

We wouldn’t be able to give any sort of answer without knowing your current and 
future requirements. Each model has its own throughput classes, and sometimes a 
full on MX router isn’t required.

 

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Javier 
Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 1:55 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Juniper hardware recommendation

 

Hi, 

Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?

MX208,480,10K

Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it 

Thanks,

 

Javier Gutierrez Guerra

Network Analyst

CCNA R, JNCIA

Westman Communications Group

Phone: 204-717-2827

Email:   guer...@westmancom.com

  

 



 

RE: Juniper hardware recommendation

[Adam Thompson]

Hi, Javier!
MX series: Full-featured – sings, dances, walks the cat, etc. But painful 
racking (as you noted).  Very nice and comprehensive boxes otherwise.  
Interfaces are more expensive, but often modular and wider variety.
EX/QFX series: Nice switches, OK L3 routers.  Lots of limitations in MPLS and 
various other corner-case limitations.

My personal opinion:

  *   Skip the MX480 (and up), it’s just too expensive.  Consider an EX9200 
instead, which can do 90% of the same functions.  (If you can afford an MX480 
or MX960, by all means, get one!)
  *   MX240 is reasonable, but dated.  A pair of MX204s in HA would make more 
sense, to me.
  *   Skip the MX 2k/10k series – they don’t support SFP+ interfaces!  (“No 10G 
WDM for you!”)  Also no 1G, you need a separate step-down switch for that.  I 
don’t know what SP Juniper thinks they’re targeting with these.
  *   1U/2U EX/QFX are reasonable edge devices as long as you’ve verified they 
can do what you need.  Not core-router class IMHO.
  *   If you don’t already know that you want a PTX, then you don’t want a PTX. 
 The product is fine, but niche, and has the same interface limitations as 
MX10k.
  *   ACX: MEF-compliant mini-MX, basically.  Edge device only, pairs well with 
an MX480 (IIRC).  Top-end are exceptions: ACX5k/7k might work, depending on 
what you need it to do.  Not normally deployed as a core router.

My experience is that you never fill up an EX9208 or MX480 chassis, but the 
MX240 is too small.  YMMV.  MX480 line cards are stupid expensive compared to, 
well, everything else.

I’m probably out-of-date on some (or much) of my knowledge, let’s see what 
everyone else here has to say!

-Adam

Adam Thompson
Consultant, Infrastructure Services
[[MERLIN LOGO]]
100 - 135 Innovation Drive
Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8
(204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
athomp...@merlin.mb.ca
www.merlin.mb.ca

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of 
Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 3:55 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Juniper hardware recommendation

Hi,
Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?
MX208,480,10K
Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it 
Thanks,

Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Network Analyst
CCNA R, JNCIA
Westman Communications Group
Phone: 204-717-2827
Email: guer...@westmancom.com
[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR]

[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]

Juniper hardware recommendation

[Javier Gutierrez Guerra]

Hi,
Just out of curiosity, what would you recommend using for a core router/switch 
from Juniper?
MX208,480,10K
Datasheets show them all as very nice and powerful devices (although they do 
use a lot of rack space and side to side airflow is painful) but I’m just 
wondering here what most people use and how good or bad of an experience you 
have with it 
Thanks,

Javier Gutierrez Guerra
Network Analyst
CCNA R, JNCIA
Westman Communications Group
Phone: 204-717-2827
Email: guer...@westmancom.com
[WCG_Corp_Logo_horiz_cFullcolorHR]

[cisco-certified-network-associate-routing-and-switching-ccna-routing-and-switching]

Weekly Routing Table Report

[Routing Analysis Role Account]

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.

The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.

Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net

For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net.

If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .

Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 08 May, 2021

Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net
Detailed Analysis:  http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/

Analysis Summary


BGP routing table entries examined:  857788
Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS):  324705
Deaggregation factor:  2.64
Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets):  407262
Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 71214
Prefixes per ASN: 12.05
Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   61232
Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   25265
Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:9982
Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:323
Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table:   4.3
Max AS path length visible:  31
Max AS path prepend of ASN (206999)  29
Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:  1076
Number of instances of unregistered ASNs:  1083
Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs:  35977
Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   29920
Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:  139163
Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:24
Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:1
Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:567
Number of addresses announced to Internet:   3030129536
Equivalent to 180 /8s, 156 /16s and 27 /24s
Percentage of available address space announced:   81.8
Percentage of allocated address space announced:   81.8
Percentage of available address space allocated:  100.0
Percentage of address space in use by end-sites:   99.5
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  290936

APNIC Region Analysis Summary
-

Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:   226816
Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation:   65462
APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.46
Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks:  222971
Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:89686
APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   11571
APNIC Prefixes per ASN:   19.27
APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   3319
APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   1639
Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.5
Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 31
Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   6727
Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet:  772779264
Equivalent to 46 /8s, 15 /16s and 173 /24s
APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431
(pre-ERX allocations)  23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319,
   58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-147769
APNIC Address Blocks 1/8,  14/8,  27/8,  36/8,  39/8,  42/8,  43/8,
49/8,  58/8,  59/8,  60/8,  61/8, 101/8, 103/8,
   106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8,
   116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8,
   123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8,
   163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8,
   203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8,
   222/8, 223/8,

ARIN Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:247094
Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:   113150
ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.18
Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:   247473
Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks:118039
ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:18804
ARIN Prefixes per ASN:13.16
ARIN