On 9/Jul/15 15:27, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: > Interesting facts. > Now the Juniper MX104 win over Cisco ASR903 (max prefix limit) is not that > clear anymore. > > Since the chassis is 80Gbps in total I'd assume around 40Gbps towards > aggregation and 40Gbps to backbone. > > Also if BFD is really not offloaded into HW it would be a bummer on such a > slow CPU. > > With regards to 1588 I'd like to know if or how anyone deployed this on MPLS > backbone if the 4G is in a VRF??? > In other words 1588 runs in GRT/inet.0 so how do you then rely the precise > per hop delay/jitter info to a 4G cell which sits in a VRF? > Never mind that the cell doesn't really need this precision and running 1588 > with the server in 4G VRF across the 1588-blind MPLS core is enough. > > It seems Juniper is still waiting for a big customer that is not willing to > wait for BGP to converge millions of MAC addresses if DF PE fails (PBB-EVPN)
When my MX80's and ASR9001's run out of steam (we use these for peering and transit), I'll look at the MX104, ASR1006 and ASR9904 as potential replacements. I think the MX104 is good enough for peering/transit. I also think it's good enough for low-speed edge routing, e.g., non-Ethernet. I'd likely never deploy an MX104 in places where the MX480/960 or the larger ASR9900 routers are better-suited, i.e., major Ethernet aggregation. Mark. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
