On Thursday, December 30, 2010 08:24:34 am Jonathan Towne
wrote:
> We landed an RUS grant and spec'd 2*ASR1k into that
> funding, then managed to land a second RUS grant in the
> second round.. found that the ASRs wouldn't have enough
> port density for how we wanted to lay things out.
The ASR10
On Thursday, December 30, 2010 07:03:40 am Keith wrote:
> We did not have a need for any of the other WAN hardware
> so we do only ethernet and have a mix of MM/SM and
> copper. With the 20 port MIC card it meets our ethernet
> side quite well.
If you're an Ethernet-only house, the MX-series make
For what it's worth, I was about to reply to this thread with almost
the exact same as below, and then this arrived in my mailbox, so
I'll add a bit to my original response :)
Here goes:
We're running on a way overworked 7206VXR with an NPE-300, 256MB of
RAM.. attempting BGP feeds from 3 provider
Hi.
We have a 7206 w/NPE-G1 and looked at the ASR as a replacement after
looking at both Juniper and Cisco and getting quotes from both vendors
we decided on the MX480.
MX480 was slightly more than the ASR gear we looked at, but offered
better redundancy and higher port count. But still overall
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 12:26:15 pm Julien Goodwin
wrote:
> And Cisco aren't *worse* at this? Look at the supported
> platforms for VPLS for example. I can run VPLS on an M40
> if I had one (yes, with a tunnel PIC, or specific other
> PIC's).
I likely wouldn't consider VPLS a basic featu
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 06:33:04 am Keegan Holley
wrote:
> I'm not sure what you we're referring to here, but I
> assume you mean the additional features available in the
> cisco such as stateful firewall, etc. There is a
> difference there, but most NSP's don't use them. There
> is also
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 04:37:25 am Keegan Holley
wrote:
> In all fairness cisco has some similar silliness,
> although the Juniper version tends to be much more
> inconvenient and costly.
Agree, but I was referring to the newer generation of
platforms both vendors are putting out today
> > > > This is more of a question, but I always assumed that
> > > > the ASR overlapped
> > >
> > > somewhere between the J and M series.
> >
> > Right now, IMHO, the ASR1000 is way more advanced than the
> > J-series (apples vs. oranges, really),
>
>
> I'm not sure what you we're referring to h
>
> Mark, perfect explanation. I recently ran into a limitaion in that I
> wanted to do traffic shaping on a M series, come to find that you must have
> queuing pics to do it. I ended up going with an asr as it does it with built
> in hardware. The M box was 60k more msrp... I needed 4 boxes, d
On 29/12/10 04:39, Mark Tinka wrote:
> The things that currently annoy me with Juniper are:
> - JUNOS has been terrible, hopefully 2011 is a
> better year.
Absolutely, although I've found that only really in the SRX line where
both 10.3 & 10.4 are unusable as RPD never comes up (*sec
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 04:37:25 am Keegan Holley
> wrote:
>
> > In all fairness cisco has some similar silliness,
> > although the Juniper version tends to be much more
> > inconvenient and costly.
>
> Agree, but I was referring to the
>
> The price gap is even more interesting.
>
I suppose this depends on your relationship with both companies. Many of
the shops that have this buy cisco equipment at a 40% plus discount because
of volume, but pay list or nearly so for the Juniper equipment.
>
> The things that currently annoy m
Mark, perfect explanation. I recently ran into a limitaion in that I
wanted to do traffic shaping on a M series, come to find that you must have
queuing pics to do it. I ended up going with an asr as it does it with built
in hardware. The M box was 60k more msrp... I needed 4 boxes, do the math.
On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:34:42 am Jonathan Lassoff
wrote:
> Many resellers will give you a good deal if you're
> checking out Juniper for the first time, since they
> usually have way better products that Cisco but cost a
> little more. It's easy to get hooked on well-made
> routers :p
I
On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:25:40 am Chris Evans wrote:
> If you are looking for a high performance box to replace
> a 7200 the M of juniper is the closet product match for
> the 7200. Honestly I would recommend the Cisco asr1k
> though. It can do all of the features you are looking
> for ou
We upgraded from NPE-G1s to M7i couple of years back , we are highly
impressed and highly recommenced..!
Perhaps you should also explore Foundry XMR-4 .
Samit
On 12/28/10 8:49 AM, Dwater wrote:
> I was thinking on M10i with ECFEB and related PIC. Any comments or
> recommendations?
>
> On Dec 2
I was thinking on M10i with ECFEB and related PIC. Any comments or
recommendations?
On Dec 27, 2010, at 9:34 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
> I guess that would depend on the hardware configuration that you have
> in your 7206? What NPE are you using?
>
> Assuming you're using an NPE-G1, which ca
I guess that would depend on the hardware configuration that you have
in your 7206? What NPE are you using?
Assuming you're using an NPE-G1, which can run a few GigE ports at 1
Mpps, some comparable routers might be:
Juniper J6350 -- A CPU-based router (more inexpensive) that'll route
400 Kpps an
If you are looking for a high performance box to replace a 7200 the M of
juniper is the closet product match for the 7200. Honestly I would recommend
the Cisco asr1k though. It can do all of the features you are looking for
out of the box.. Juniper m series needs an extra module to do
encryption
Mainly GE interfaces and wan MPLS connectivity with IPSec teemination as well
as Internet connectivity related device.
On Dec 27, 2010, at 9:12 PM, Adam Leff wrote:
> What type of interfaces and number of each type do you plan on terminate on
> the device? Throughput? Services?
>
> ~Adam
What type of interfaces and number of each type do you plan on terminate on
the device? Throughput? Services?
~Adam
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Dwater wrote:
> Which juniper router fits in place of 7206? We are planning to put juniper
> routers in.
> _
Which juniper router fits in place of 7206? We are planning to put juniper
routers in.
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
22 matches
Mail list logo
