Budget concerns, mostly. The client can apparently source the 3500s for
rather affordable pricing, while the 5100 is a bit too new to be
available via those mediums.
On 3/16/2014 午前 01:41, Giuliano Cardozo Medalha wrote:
why not using qfx5100 platform ?
much better low latency 0,6 us and new hardware from juniper
Sent from my iPhone
On 15/03/2014, at 13:02, "Paul S." <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi guys,
I've got a client who's interested in deploying the 3500 as TORs.
He'll need to evenly distribute around 20/30g of bandwidth (via aggregated
ethernet links) to multitudes of virtualized systems with individual vlans all
located in singular racks.
Would the QFX be an okay solution in this scenario? There's an heavy preference
towards Juniper gear due to most of the connected networks being run on Juniper
gear as well.
And if not, what would the community suggest?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________
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
