On 19/Jul/19 16:48, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> Agree with the 40g dead in the future statement above but the 100 instead of
> 40 cause it's cheaper argument I'm not actually getting.
Unless your customer says they only have 40Gbps ports, don't want N x
10Gbps, won't be buying
From: John Brown
To: juniper-nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] 40Gig Ether for MX480
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi,
I have a client that is wanting a 40Gig ether handoff. What would
folks recommend for
an interface on a MX
Same. Juniper is running WAY too late on an ACX5048 replacement with
100G interfaces. We had great expectations for the ACX5448 until we
saw the price list being 3-4x higher than the 5048.
Regarding the original question, I'd also check the MPC5 if your
budget is restricted and you have slots to
> Saku Ytti
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 7:46 AM
>
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 04:27, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> > Is there a reason to not do 4x10G or 1x100G? It’s cheap enough these
> days.
> > If they’re in-datacenter I can maybe understand 40G but outside the DC it’s
> unclear to me why someone
My ISP network is core/agg mpls rings of MX960's and ACX5048's960's
connect 40 gig to 5048's using the MPC7E-MRATE in the MX960.
Seems good to me so far
Also use MX960 40 gig on MPC7E-MRATE to DC/CDN deployments of QFX5120's
(pure Ethernet tagging).
-Aaron
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 04:27, Jared Mauch wrote:
> Is there a reason to not do 4x10G or 1x100G? It’s cheap enough these days.
> If they’re in-datacenter I can maybe understand 40G but outside the DC it’s
> unclear to me why someone would do this.
Agreed. 40GE future looks extremely bad. This
John did you google this?
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/general/mic-mx-series-40-gigabit-ethernet-qsfp.html
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 5:59 PM John Brown wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a client that is wanting a 40Gig ether handoff. What would
>
> On 19/07/2019, at 1:26 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> Is there a reason to not do 4x10G or 1x100G? It’s cheap enough these days.
>
> If they’re in-datacenter I can maybe understand 40G but outside the DC it’s
> unclear to me why someone would do this.
40G doesn’t have potential hashing
Is there a reason to not do 4x10G or 1x100G? It’s cheap enough these days.
If they’re in-datacenter I can maybe understand 40G but outside the DC it’s
unclear to me why someone would do this.
- Jared
> On Jul 18, 2019, at 6:58 PM, John Brown wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have a client that is wanting
Hi,
I have a client that is wanting a 40Gig ether handoff. What would
folks recommend for
an interface on a MX480 system?
The customer is also asking if we need to handle G.709 FEC
Thoughts and tips appreciated.
--
Respectfully,
John Brown, CISSP
Managing Member, CityLink
10 matches
Mail list logo
