On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:37:36PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote: > > Another reason I wouldn't spend money on an MX80. > > Even though the MX104 is a PPC-based platform, I'm okay to spend money > on that because the RE is modular. > > Mark.
Honestly, I like the ASR 9001 lot better than MX 104. I was somewhat dissapointed with MX104 when it came out; I was hoping it'd do more bandwidth than MX80's 80 Gbps to get a couple more 10G ports out of it; but it's practically MX80 on chassis form...and then we have craptastic and overpriced RE that rivals Sup720 on BGP convergence. Also, doesn't the MX104 have the same 256MB RLDRAM as MX80 (like mpc1), so you can only do up to ~1 to ~1.5M IPv4 routes max in FIB? or has this been improved on the MX104? ASR 9001 on the other hand.. 120 Gbps in a 2U box and control-plane performance is plenty fast (feels like RSP440), and up to 4M IPv4 in FIB so it has longer life expectancy in DFZ. Also, you can start with ASR-9001-S (60 Gbps license-locked version) to cheap out, and then upgrade to full 120 Gbps later. The upgrade license cost is not penalizing as buying MX104/MX80 upgrade licenses. You pretty much pay for the difference. Best, james _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
