On 16 April 2013 08:03, Mark Tinka <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > What I want is something based on a generic compute > > platform, ala JUNOSphere/VIRL. That lets me scale the > > control plane as big as I need to, avoids wasting money > > on purpose-built hardware optimized for forwarding, and > > comes with the added bonus of using the same OS & policy > > language that's already widely deployed in my network, > > so at least I don't get any NEW interop issues. The > > downside is that neither vendor sells such a thing right > > now, and so we're stuck arguing about which square peg > > fits best into the round hole. ("small" ASR9k and MX > > here, FWIW) > > You're preaching to the choir. > > Then again, I wouldn't suggest an ASR9001 for this task > either. 8GB is not bad, but you can get 16GB on the ASR1001. > > Also, the ASR9001 is a PPC-based platform (unlike the Intel > Xeon's on the ASR9006/9010), while the ASR1001 is an Intel, > if that makes any difference to you. >
I'd love to see Juniper take the xre200, slap some extra ram into it and call it their route reflector platform. It would be a reasonable compromise between using generic compute and Juniper getting $$$ for selling you some tin. -- Regards, Craig Askings io Networks Pty Ltd. mobile: 0404 019365 phone: 1300 1 2 4 8 16 _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
