Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2013-02-17 Thread Mark Tinka
On Monday, October 01, 2012 06:30:19 PM Skeeve Stevens wrote: What features would you be using the ASR9k for over the MX80's? It's a price thing :-). Technically, the ASR9001 can deliver 40Gbps ports on the chassis. That's one reason to choose it over the MX80 (that and the possibility

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-10-01 Thread Mark Tinka
On Tuesday, August 07, 2012 08:22:37 AM William Jackson wrote: Having used the MX80 in a previous position and now being prompted to look at the ASR 9001, I was wondering if any people have operational experience with the ASR9001 platform? Or any thoughts on comparison. I see no one replied

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-10-01 Thread Skeeve Stevens
What features would you be using the ASR9k for over the MX80's? ...Skeeve * * *Skeeve Stevens, CEO - *eintellego Pty Ltd ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellego ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-09 Thread Doug Hanks
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80 Hello. Yes and no. Yes, but befor using Trio Chipset, No because now for example MX480 system capacity is 1.92 Tbps. If I am wrong, please correct me. 2012/8/8 Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.commailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com Is any reason juniper choose the 5 for mx5, 40

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-08 Thread Xu Hu
Is any reason juniper choose the 5 for mx5, 40 for mx40, 480 for mx480? The number is for backplane bandwidth? Thanks and regards, Xu Hu On 8 Aug, 2012, at 5:30, Doug Hanks dha...@juniper.net wrote: Please note there's also the MX5 through MX40 that can be upgraded via a license to a full

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-08 Thread Tomasz MikoĊ‚ajek
Hello. Yes and no. Yes, but befor using Trio Chipset, No because now for example MX480 system capacity is 1.92 Tbps. If I am wrong, please correct me. 2012/8/8 Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com Is any reason juniper choose the 5 for mx5, 40 for mx40, 480 for mx480? The number is for backplane

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-08 Thread Doug Hanks
, juniper-nsp@puck.nether.netmailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net juniper-nsp@puck.nether.netmailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80 Hello. Yes and no. Yes, but befor using Trio Chipset, No because now for example MX480 system capacity is 1.92 Tbps. If I am wrong

[j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-07 Thread William Jackson
Hi Having used the MX80 in a previous position and now being prompted to look at the ASR 9001, I was wondering if any people have operational experience with the ASR9001 platform? Or any thoughts on comparison. These will be used for IPv4/IPv6 eBGP transit and for MPLS L2VPN/VPLS drop offs,

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-07 Thread Tima Maryin
Hi, have a look at: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/2012-May/023303.html and the whole thread: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/2012-April/023068.html They are about mx480 vs ASR9006, but most of stuff still applies. On 07.08.2012 10:22, William Jackson wrote:

Re: [j-nsp] ASR9001 vs MX80

2012-08-07 Thread Doug Hanks
Please note there's also the MX5 through MX40 that can be upgraded via a license to a full MX80 as well. On 8/7/12 1:56 AM, Tima Maryin timamar...@mail.ru wrote: Hi, have a look at: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/2012-May/023303.html and the whole thread: