Re: [j-nsp] EX 3300 vs EX 3400 for access layer

2017-09-15 Thread Harald F. Karlsen
On 15.09.2017 10:52, Phil Mayers wrote: You haven't mentioned it, but worth noting that the EX3300 cannot filter IPv6. This is a hardware limitation, and caused us to reject the EX3300 in favour of the (frankly rather overkill) EX4300. Due to this the EX3300 doesn't have (and probably never

Re: [j-nsp] EX 3300 vs EX 3400 for access layer

2017-09-15 Thread Phil Mayers
On 14/09/17 16:54, John Kristoff wrote: Friends, Our engineering team is reviewing and contemplating whether to stick with the Juniper EX 3300 switch at the edge access layer (to user wired ports, some VoIP phones, and some wireless APs also connect to these). Typically these devices can last

[j-nsp] EX 3300 vs EX 3400 for access layer

2017-09-14 Thread John Kristoff
Friends, Our engineering team is reviewing and contemplating whether to stick with the Juniper EX 3300 switch at the edge access layer (to user wired ports, some VoIP phones, and some wireless APs also connect to these). Typically these devices can last out in the field for five or more years.

Re: [j-nsp] EX 3300 vs EX 3400 for access layer

2017-09-14 Thread Chuck Anderson
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:54:54AM -0500, John Kristoff wrote: > Typically these devices can last out in the field for five or more > years. There are at least two potential concerns about this series of > switches. One, when stacking them into a larger virtual chassis (i.e. > six or more), the