Just a smaller FIB table is all I know of, we use them in a few places as transit peering points for the time being. We will probably upgrade to 480's at some point depending on the amount of routes when Ipv6 kicks in and the amount of traffic.
Matt -----Original Message----- From: juniper-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Drew Weaver Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 9:56 AM To: 'Dobbins, Roland'; 'juniper-nsp Puck' Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Advice on a 100Gbps+ environment And what is wrong with the MX80 as a peering/transit router for up to 80Gbps of traffic? Thanks, -Drew -----Original Message----- From: juniper-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dobbins, Roland Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 9:01 AM To: juniper-nsp Puck Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Advice on a 100Gbps+ environment On Jul 2, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > Says who? Doh - MX*480*, not MX*80*. My mistake. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Luck is the residue of opportunity and design. -- John Milton _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
