Just serious. If you have strict budget problem, why not use DELL Force10 S4810? For L3 line rate inter vlan routing, it works pretty well. Use it as TOR seems a good and inexpensive solution, plus it has 4x40GE QSFP+ port can be used as uplink. On Mar 16, 2014 9:43 AM, "Paul S." <cont...@winterei.se> wrote:
> Budget concerns, mostly. The client can apparently source the 3500s for > rather affordable pricing, while the 5100 is a bit too new to be available > via those mediums. > > On 3/16/2014 午前 01:41, Giuliano Cardozo Medalha wrote: > >> why not using qfx5100 platform ? >> >> much better low latency 0,6 us and new hardware from juniper >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 15/03/2014, at 13:02, "Paul S." <cont...@winterei.se> wrote: >>> >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> I've got a client who's interested in deploying the 3500 as TORs. >>> >>> He'll need to evenly distribute around 20/30g of bandwidth (via >>> aggregated ethernet links) to multitudes of virtualized systems with >>> individual vlans all located in singular racks. >>> >>> Would the QFX be an okay solution in this scenario? There's an heavy >>> preference towards Juniper gear due to most of the connected networks being >>> run on Juniper gear as well. >>> >>> And if not, what would the community suggest? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
