On 12/Nov/15 15:05, Alexandre Guimaraes wrote:
> Taking a hide with Aaron, > > Reading carefully this thread, looking at ACX5000 e QFX5100, I would > like to 'hear' the QFX51000 considerations. > > Today, use them at distribution layer, delivering more than 6 switches > as a virtual chassis configuration, never had a big issue regarding the > software or cpu/memory issues. > > When version 14.1 was released, I just start to tests those QFX5100 due > to 40Gb ports, for l2circuits/p2p circuits with all MPLS services, regarding > some limitation(vpls), and never had major issues regarding the software > issues and so on, even using ISSU for upgrade the QFX5100. > > Richard mentioned a bad experience with QFX5100. > > Richard, > Coud you please share what you had experienced? The ACX is based on the QFX. So if you want "better" routing on this platform, the ACX is the way to go. Think of it as the MX being a better router version of the EX. Mark. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
