And the change now announced on 15.1 (new release) using freebsd 10 will not help to solve it ?
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 12:33, Colton Conor <[email protected]> wrote: > > Saku, > > You seem to be very familiar with the major routing vendors implementations > on SMP. Do you consider the lack of SMP support on Juniper a reason not to > go with Juniper until implemented. Particularly interested to hear about > JunOS vs TimOS. > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Saku Ytti <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 3 October 2015 at 03:41, Olivier Benghozi >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >>> I have heard that: >>> 1) forget it about PowerPC CPUs (MX 80/104). >> >> This is shame, but completely understandable, give customers couple >> more years on old kit or force them to buy new kit? I'm afraid maybe >> no HW of current generation will get SMP support. I'm sure marketing >> is pondering lot how many customers would switch vendor versus how >> many customers would just buy new next-gen hardware when deciding >> which platforms to target for SMP. >> >> I honestly believe that SMP is weekend project for single developer on >> JunOS now that they've remedied the underlaying FreeBSD issues. Fixing >> rpd mess is certainly big deal. But just affinity to put RPD on its >> own core and rest on the other core on MX80/MX104 should be terribly >> trivial. >> >> Even radar plans for RPD + threads is far cry from what other vendors >> are doing already with SMP on XR, EOS and particularly TimOS. But >> still very nice that JNPR is finally doing something. >> >> -- >> ++ytti >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
