I have resisted the temptation to get involved in this, but since it's already
being discussed some, I've got a question:
"Net Bum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had a Cisco 2600 series on my side and I asked him what he had on
> his side. He said (as if I wouldn't know :-), "A big router, it's a Cisco
> 12000 series." Then I asked him, "Do you use any Juniper stuff?" He said,
> "Yes, we use them in our core. They are behind the 12000's."
This is not the first time I've heard this; major ISPs utilizing Juniper in
parts of their core, but always using Cisco at the edge.
About 6 months ago, I was down at one of Cisco's offices in Florida (Ft.
Lauderdale), for a 2 day BGP seminar. I caught the guy who was giving the
seminar out in the hall afterward, and we were talking about a multitude of
topics, and Juniper came up. He had mostly good things to say about them,
particularly about their speed (He was a relatively new employee at Cisco... He
might not have drank the Kool-Aid yet).
One of the things he did criticize, however, was some kind of problem Juniper
had with their BGP4 implementation, and he specifically mentioned that Juniper
was making a dent at the core (understatement perhaps), but that they were
having a difficult time at the edge as a result of this BGP problem.
I regret, now, not pressing him for more detail, and as I haven't been doing
anything BGP related, I haven't really taken the time to research this.
Is anyone on the list familiar with a problem with Juniper's BGP implementation
when peering with other vendors?
Alan
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
