On 11/Nov/16 00:44, Clarke Morledge wrote:
> > Right now, we do employ redundant routing engines (1300s and 1800s), > but mostly with ISSU in mind. The failure rate for routing engines, > even with the older hard disk models, has been rather low, in our > experience. So, the primary benefit has been to provide support for > "hitless" upgrades via ISSU. We've had at least 3 RE's fail every year on different platforms, for various reasons. That is too high for us. I think the ability to VM's is great, especially because you can cut-over upgrades much more quickly, and you can have different versions of Junos doing different things on the same box, e.g., one VM doing Business services on 2 line cards, another VM doing Subscriber Management on 2 other line cards, e.t.c. But I don't think it negates the need for dual RE's. RE's are still fragile, and things happen. Mark. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
