Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

2017-05-02 Thread adamv0025
> James Bensley > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 10:28 AM > > On 2 May 2017 at 09:47, wrote: > > Oh dear, 16.67Mpps budget per 10GE is now acceptable? We're doomed. > > Line-rate 10Gbps@L2(64B)@L1(84B) is 29.761Mpps (both directions) > > -that's what I'd expect the modern 100GE LCs to deliver, not

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

2017-05-02 Thread James Bensley
On 2 May 2017 at 09:47, wrote: > Oh dear, 16.67Mpps budget per 10GE is now acceptable? We're doomed. > Line-rate 10Gbps@L2(64B)@L1(84B) is 29.761Mpps (both directions) -that's > what I'd expect the modern 100GE LCs to deliver, not that I'd like to > forward 64B frames at 240G but to forward highe

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco IGP / BFD Dampening (Suppressing Unstable WAN Links)

2017-05-02 Thread James Bensley
Hi, If you use carrier-delay with BFD then the interface won't be signalled as up to the IGP until BFD has been established. Or am I miss-remembering this? I belive that if you use something like "carrier-delay down 0 up 5000" on an interface with BFD, if the interface goes down hard down or a la

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

2017-05-02 Thread Saku Ytti
On 2 May 2017 at 09:22, James Jun wrote: Hey James, > After all, once the 9901 is out, what purpose is there for 9001 to stick > around > for new revenue opportunities? Future seems bleak for 9001. > > To be honest, MX104 seems kind of same story on Juniper land, it was cool to > see modular

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

2017-05-02 Thread adamv0025
> Tom Hill > Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 9:21 PM > > > Looking at the GPL, the new 24x10G/1G card is a bit cheaper than the > > equivalent Typhoon 24x10G card, and takes noticeably less power, as > > there is single NPU and FIA complex driving the whole card. So it > > does seem like cost effectiv