On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 06:33:04 am Keegan Holley wrote: > I'm not sure what you we're referring to here, but I > assume you mean the additional features available in the > cisco such as stateful firewall, etc. There is a > difference there, but most NSP's don't use them. There > is also a severe performance hit since it's a software > platform.
No, I'm not talking about those additional security features, since most times I'm deploying an ASR1000 or a J- series router, it's just for plain IP routing. But that's just me... > Really? It seems strange that a software based platform > would out perform a silicon based platform. Where are > did you get your info from? The ASR1000 is hardware-based. > This is interesting as well. I believe the larger slot > chassis are hardware based I'm not sure about the > performance gap, but I'm sure the cisco is cheaper. All ASR1000 platforms are hardware-based. > I suppose it depends on your needs. Burning two slots in > the MX in order to support TDM PICs isn't very appealing > either. My point exactly. Without a smaller offering from Juniper, it's really hard not to consider the competition when you need some TDM/SDH/SONET line cards in there. Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
