On Wednesday, January 02, 2013 04:52:02 PM Eric Van Tol
wrote:
> Unfortunately, I do not. There may be other differences
> between the two which is why they were pushing the
> ME3800X, such as buffer space or other QoS related
> differences. Perhaps it was a positioning issue, but if
> that's t
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Riccardo S
> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 9:36 AM
> To: je...@atlantech.net
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp]
Hi Eric
I guess 3750X could be an option.
By the way the use needed by this machine is a ethernet customer aggregator
(hence many eth ports) with the need of BGP/PIM sessions for mcast
redistribution from the core (hence needs of BGP/PIM but no MPLS).
I know EX4200 can support up to 128 BG
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Riccardo S
> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 9:04 AM
> To: jackson@gmail.com
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp]
Hi Tim
indeed was Cisco directly telling me to use C3800X but I guess I know why
I was thinking to EX4200 or EX4550...
MPLS is not needed.
Cisco 3400E has only 10/100 24 ports and 2 combo as far as I know...
Ric
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 07:56:06 -0600
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper equivalent
Any of the EX3200/3300/4200 meet those requirements, but do not have the
full MPLS suite that the 3800X will have, nor do they have the buffers that
the 3800X does.
If that's all you want from a switch, the 3800X is overkill, maybe look at
ME3400E vs EX4200/3300..
--
Tim
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at
Which is,
from your point of view, the equivalent model of Cisco 3800X metro ethernet ?
I’m
focusing on the following feature needed:
-
At
least 24 gigaethernet ports
-
Full
BGP support
-
Full
multicast support
-
Ethernet-aggregation
(LAG)
-
7 matches
Mail list logo