On Monday, April 01, 2013 05:44:59 PM Pavel Lunin wrote:
Well, I'd also really like to have a Juniper box
competing against Catalyst ME, but, again, I believe
there might be (I don't say there is) some common
sense in not even trying to play this game. I can easily
imagine sane reasons for
On Tuesday, April 02, 2013 04:34:18 PM Pavel Lunin wrote:
I just wanted to note, that from the money point of view
at the time when MX80 was under construction, it /could/
be a wise decision to not compete against products like
CES/CER and make it more router-alike than a MetroE
optimized
I couldn't agree more. Funnily enough when I saw the EX2200C-12 get
released being both fanless and shallow depth the first use case I
thought was ME NTU/Small PoP. Front-mounted power would have been
nice, but hey, I'll deal. There are enough dot1q-tunnelling knobs
built-in* for most
31.03.2013 18:18, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 01:41:47 PM Pavel Lunin wrote:
Looks like Juniper just did not much care metro ethernet.
BTW, it's sometimes said, that the reason is a lack of
such a market in North America (where I've even never
been to, thus can't judge
Epic fail on Juniper's part to think that networks will
still go for too big boxes for small box deployments.
The ERBU head promised that they were looking at a 1U MX80
box that would rival the Cisco and Brocade options in the
access, but I think they thought coming up with the MX5,
On 2 April 2013 09:06, Ben Dale bd...@comlinx.com.au wrote:
I couldn't agree more. Funnily enough when I saw the EX2200C-12 get
released being both fanless and shallow depth the first use case I thought
was ME NTU/Small PoP.
Front-mounted power would have been nice, but hey, I'll deal.
On Friday, January 11, 2013 01:41:47 PM Pavel Lunin wrote:
Looks like Juniper just did not much care metro ethernet.
BTW, it's sometimes said, that the reason is a lack of
such a market in North America (where I've even never
been to, thus can't judge whether this sentence is
correct :).
On Sunday, March 31, 2013 05:28:02 PM Jeff Wheeler wrote:
Just problem #1 clearly demonstrates that
upper-management has no idea what they are doing. They
are managing their inventory like they're making
automobiles with razor-thin margins, not I.T. products
which sell for many multiples of
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
no answer to Cisco's ASR1000. Even just for route
reflection, I'd be very hard-pressed to choose a US$1 MX480
with a 16GB RE over a Cisco ASR1001 costing ten thousand
times the price.
These are all symptoms of Juniper's
So is there anything reasonably priced in the Juniper lineup for this kind
of situation or do we look at Cisco/other?
If a bunch of MX5's doesn't fit the price expectation, than, I would
say, Cisco/other.
Looks like Juniper just did not much care metro ethernet. BTW, it's
sometimes said, that
Hi folks..
We have a customer that has a Cisco 6500 - very old and they want to retire
it out of service (12+ years old). The customer is a municipal fiber
provider and their main business is providing connectivity (vs providing
Internet).
They have approached us about a Juniper
Hi,
Am 10.01.2013 14:03, schrieb Paul Stewart:
Per port ingress and egress bandwidth control (rate limiting with burst)
Per VLAN ingress and egress bandwidth control (rate limiting on a per VLAN
basis with burst)
As you mentioned this could be the problem or showstopper.
We have not yet
-nsp] EX Switch Question
Hi,
Am 10.01.2013 14:03, schrieb Paul Stewart:
Per port ingress and egress bandwidth control (rate limiting with burst)
Per VLAN ingress and egress bandwidth control (rate limiting on a per VLAN
basis with burst)
As you mentioned this could be the problem
Granath [mailto:per.gran...@gcc.com.cy]
Sent: January-10-13 9:18 AM
To: Paul Stewart; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] EX Switch Question
The general idea is to do:
Policing (firewall filter) on ingress
Shaping (CoS) on egress
http://www.juniper.net/us/en/local/pdf
: 'juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Switch Question
Just avoid the 4500 if you need anything less than 1G copper. The ports on
the 4500 won't negotiate to 10 or 100. I was told by the sales engineer
that this switch is a top of rack switch so it doesn't support anything
less than
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 9:23 AM
To: 'Per Granath'; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Switch Question
Thanks
Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org writes:
Per VLAN ingress and egress bandwidth control (rate limiting on a per VLAN
basis with burst)
That sounds like hierarchial shaping. You need MX for that, and even
then you may meet challenges doing it on ingress.
I would have thought that the 6500
Hello,
Tobias Heister (Thu 2013-01-10 14:31:40 +0100) :
We have not yet found an EX platform (tried
2200/3200/4200/4500/8200) which supported policing on egress (using
Firewall filters and policing, never tried using QoS)
I don't know for the OP needs but for shure EX4200 does not have:
-
:59 AM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Switch Question
Hello,
Tobias Heister (Thu 2013-01-10 14:31:40 +0100) :
We have not yet found an EX platform (tried
2200/3200/4200/4500/8200) which supported policing on egress (using
Firewall filters and policing, never tried
Amorsen [mailto:benny+use...@amorsen.dk]
Sent: January-10-13 9:41 AM
To: Paul Stewart
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Switch Question
Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org writes:
Per VLAN ingress and egress bandwidth control (rate limiting on a per
VLAN basis with burst
On 01/10/2013 10:21 AM, Paul Stewart wrote:
Thank you - yes, both of those issues you highlighted have created problems
for us especially lack of tcp established
note also that (i believe still) packets which would pass through the
box (when it's doing L3 things) but expire on the box...
Just don't go there. EX is in no way a metro SP switch.
Very common case, we've been discussing it with many customers, who
their-selves want a Juniper metro SP solution, maybe once a week since
the EX series was launched. After all that I am 100% sure this is not
what EX is all about.
@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX Switch Question
Just don't go there. EX is in no way a metro SP switch.
Very common case, we've been discussing it with many customers, who
their-selves want a Juniper metro SP solution, maybe once a week since the
EX series was launched. After all that I am 100% sure
23 matches
Mail list logo
