Skipped right over 40G deployments and went to 100G ….at the time (a year and half ago) 100G made more sense for our requirements and there wasn’t a lot of price difference in gear. Obviously there was some price differences but it wasn’t enough …. A lot of the price was in the optics and I know in the past 6 months we’ve seen 100G optics drop in cost substantially …
Everyone’s requirements are different… budgets are different, and of course YMMV … From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2016 12:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 40G It would be getting waves on someone else's long haul network. 10G is a slam dunk over 10x 1G. Just checking out the scene for 40G. ----- Mike Hammett <http://www.ics-il.com/> Intelligent Computing Solutions <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> Midwest Internet Exchange <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> The Brothers WISP <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> _____ From: "Sterling Jacobson" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2016 11:25:12 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 40G Depends on the distance, is this for WAN over a mile or two? QSFP+ modules and switches can be cheap, but I agree that long distance bonding of 4x10 SFP+ modules is cheaper. From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2016 10:22 AM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 40G i think is more cost effective to bond 4 10g? Sent from Outlook Mobile <https://aka.ms/qtex0l> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 9:17 AM -0800, "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Which means that 40Gb WAN kin is now a steal :) On Feb 27, 2016 11:05 AM, "Gino Villarini" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: 40g is for lan, wan has jumped to 100g Sent from Outlook Mobile <https://aka.ms/qtex0l> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 8:37 AM -0800, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: For those of you that have looked at 40G, what are your thoughts on the hardware available? I'm looking at primarily switching, though something that does VPLS, CE or similar features would be nice. Something with TRILL or a TRILL derivative would be nice too. I'm not talking Juniper MX scale. Light on power is one of the biggest priorities. It doesn't need to have a million ports, either. I do like the Nexus 9k that we've got, but in some areas, something with more functionality would be nice. I'm perfectly aware that what I want feature wise may not be available cost wise. ----- Mike Hammett <http://www.ics-il.com/> Intelligent Computing Solutions <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> Midwest Internet Exchange <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> The Brothers WISP <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
