On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Joel Jaeggli <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/24/11 12:44 AM, cjwstudios wrote: >> Hi Jonathan, thanks for the reply. >> >> The application is a service provider edge, all ethernet, with routed >> traffic to two carriers. Internal traffic is a mix of IGP and OSPF. >> >> I'll have to take a look at the EX series. All of the literature on >> the juniper site suggests the EX is targeted more toward lan >> aggregation while the SRX handles the edge. > > ex doesn't have enough fib for a ful table so If you need to take two > feeds and install all those routes, it's the wrong platform. m7i is just > ducky at the speed you're talking but the re-400 is a bit underpowered > and ramed for the modern era. re-850 with 1.5GB however is tollerable.
This is a very good point, and one that I kinda didn't think about. It would probably be fine to take a decently-sized IGP table, but not an external one. Though it could be used to terminate an MPLS path to pin the BGP sessions and traffic elsewhere. There's kinda a hole in Juniper's product line between something small like a J-series or SRX and an M or MX-series box. I suppose the MX80 fills that hole somewhat, but certainly not cost-wise. If you can work some aggressive pricing (which at the end of a quarter or year can be easier), it can be a pretty good deal for an amazing box. If you can afford it, use an MX80 for an all-Ethernet environment. I've got several going, and they're just great. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
