On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 at 17:15, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Technically, do we not think that an oversubscribed Juniper box with a
> single Trio 6 chip with no fabric is feasible? And is it not being built
> because Juniper don't want to cannibalize their other distributed
> compact boxes?
>
> The MX204,
On 7/2/23 15:19, Saku Ytti wrote:
Right as is MX304.
I don't think this is 'my definition', everything was centralised
originally, until Cisco7500 came out, which then had distributed
forwarding capabilities.
Now does centralisation truly mean BOM benefit to vendors? Probably
not, but it
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 at 15:53, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp
wrote:
> Well, by your definition, the ASR9903, for example, is a distributed
> platform, which has a fabric ASIC via the RP, with 4x NPU's on the fixed
> line card, 2x NPU's on the 800Gbps PEC and 4x NPU's on the 2Tbps PEC.
Right as is
On 6/28/23 09:29, Saku Ytti via juniper-nsp wrote:
This of course makes it more redundant than distributed box, because
distributed boxes don't have NPU redundancy.
Well, by your definition, the ASR9903, for example, is a distributed
platform, which has a fabric ASIC via the RP, with 4x
On 7/2/23 11:18, Saku Ytti wrote:
In this context, these are all distributed platforms, they have
multiple NPUs and fabric. Centralised has a single forwarding chip,
and significantly more ports than bandwidth.
So to clarify your definition of "centralized", even if there is no
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 at 12:11, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Well, for data centre aggregation, especially for 100Gbps transit ports
> to customers, centralized routers make sense (MX304, MX10003, ASR9903,
> e.t.c.). But those boxes don't make sense as Metro-E routers... they can
> aggregate Metro-E
On 7/2/23 10:42, Saku Ytti wrote:
Yes. Satellite is basically VLAN aggregation, but a little bit less
broken. Both are much inferior to MPLS.
I agree that using vendor satellites solves this problem. The issue,
IIRC, is was what happens when you need to have the satellites in rings?
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 at 11:38, Mark Tinka wrote:
> So all the above sounds to me like scenarios where Metro-E rings are
> built on 802.1Q/Q-in-Q/REP/STP/e.t.c., rather than IP/MPLS.
Yes. Satellite is basically VLAN aggregation, but a little bit less
broken. Both are much inferior to MPLS. But
On 6/28/23 08:44, Saku Ytti wrote:
Apart from obvious stuff like QoS getting difficult, not full feature
parity with VLAN and main interface, or counters becoming less useful
as many are port level so identifying true source port may not be
easy. There are things that you'll just discover
9 matches
Mail list logo