On Thursday 01 July 2010 05:27:26 am Joe Hughes wrote: > I began an exercise a few months back researching the > options available to replace some of our Cisco gear with > Juniper. At the time - it was looking like a combination > of the M7i and the EX series switches -
We implemented this combo for some Metro deployments in our attempt to have a non-STP-based control plane in the Access. It works quite well. But the MX80 makes much more sense now. > but since > learning the EX has limitations in regard to MPLS and > the fact the M7i is getting old - the MX looked a > perfect candidate; decent port density with sufficient > horsepower. Despite the attractiveness of the platform, > I'm not sure I could cope with the sleepless nights. We couldn't wait to get the Trio-based cards and moved to purchase our new batch of MX480 DPC's. Even if we'd gotten them (which would have been several months later), tons of bugs would need to be worked out (recall the start of this thread). The real PITA is that the Trio cards will give you more value for money when you start looking at platforms like the MX240 or higher. Just that the code sucks today. I mean, what Richard was trying to do was pretty stock. If this issue is not limited to the batch of kit he received, JUNOS has really become something else. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
