On Friday, October 21, 2011 07:08:15 AM Phil Bedard wrote: > Having a > separate core also sets us up for some of the devices > coming in the future which may take the place of a full > featured MPLS router with something with a simplified > control/forwarding plane (stripped-down LSR) or a device > with combined packet/optical which can take the place of > both our P nodes and DWDM transport nodes. I'd like to > see more virtualization to be able to use the same > chassis/line cards as two separate routers and the > ability to virtually connect them via an internal > fabric. I know this is doable on the multi-chassis > systems from C/J but those systems are expensive and add > additional complexity.
Juniper's disappointing PTX router was meant to make this possible with their Express Chip. But I think they missed the mark here, and even though both Cisco and Juniper can develop cheap, high-speed 1U P routers, they probably won't. As of today, your best bet is a CRS with FP-* line cards, or the ASR9000; or Juniper's MX. I'm not yet sure IPoDWDM + SDR (logical systems on a Juniper) is ready to do enough to make what you state, above, a real reality. > Right now the reason collapsing is a non-starter is we > don't have the density on any current MPLS router to use > a combined P/PE in most locations unless we go to > multi-chassis configurations. The ASR9922 is probably what you're looking for, although it might be a little big for the smallest of PoP's, unless you can achieve huge savings in your P/PE deployment. The competition has something similar in the pipeline as well, but as it's not yet official, I'll keep my mouth shut for now :-). Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
