but I think they have the same price for a bundle with 2 AC/DC Power supply the 5100 price is better
and do not forget to buy the managment module for qfx3500 Sent from my iPhone > On 16/03/2014, at 13:40, "Paul S." <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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
