I concur with single platform too. We are now 6500 data center, core/distribution, internet edge/border. If we go forward, we have to consider ASR9K, Nexus7000, and even ASR1000. That's where Juniper MX960 is really a good alternative for us to consider, plus MX960 has all sorts of MPLS VPN support.
Schilling On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Gert Doering <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 12:35:48PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote: >> [ 6500 ] >> Personally, I'm not sad to see it replaced. > > Well, neither am I - but then, I don't really want to buy three different > boxes to replace a single 6500... (with three different operating systems). > > But we're not buying yet - for our bandwidth and port density needs, the > 6500 is still a very good match, and we know most of the quirks by now > (most annoying is "show int acc" counters miscounting IPv6, slowwww CPU, > and lack of per-interface netflow for IPv6). And I *like* the 6500, > it's just amazingly robust. We even have a few running Sup2+CatOS, > perfect layer2 edge switch for 100M<->GE-channel aggregation. > > gert > > -- > USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! > //www.muc.de/~gert/ > Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected] > fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
