Butch Evans wrote:
More functionality from a Cisco? You MUST be joking. MT (and
ImageStream for that matter) can do WAY more than Cisco for a
fraction
of the price. Both will offer a much better firewall option,
infinitely
better QOS capability and is easily as good with dynamic routing
(BGP,
OSPF, etc.). What's more, you can have a spare on the shelf and
STILL
not spend as much money as you would for a Cisco device.
Yeah, that's what the brochure says anyways, but I don't know of
many highly scaled networks using 'mikrotic' and some of the reasons
come down to management, software stability and a readily available pool
of knowledgeable admins ready to build the next google with it. Don't
get me wrong - I believe in linux and am a network operator as well as
embedded systems software developer who makes network appliances with it
(linux) that do all of the above for use in my network of a 1000+
subscribers, and I sleep very well at night. However, that sleep comes
with the price of having to be a linux guru in order to do most network
config operations, and in the 8 years I have been eating my own dog food
and running in my network now, I've not encountered many who I could
successfully pass off network admin duties too for these boxes (quagga,
iproute2, ebtables, iptables for instance) and centralized management
and configuration control is non-existent. These commercial systems you
scoff at also support advanced and important features such as online
insertion/removal - which lets you take a card like a gigE switch
module, or a fiber/sonet interface, or a ds3, and just plug it in and
immediately without a reboot or driver searching/updating/missing dance,
start working. Another important difference is that these commercial
units are NOT hosts and don't have silly host/desktop type stuff going
on within them, like periodic flash writes, file systems filling with
junk that causes system hangs, or hundeds of other possible reasons and
causes that create 'system down' on host type machines that DON'T affect
the commercial boxes, and contribute (in theory anyways) to the
continued prospect of very long uptimes and reliable operation. Also
basic hardware features like dual and triple redundant power supplies,
good fans and overall rugged design that further contribute to long
lives (again in theory), that PC/x86 and other COTS SBC type hardware
does not have.
So in summary, for small jobs, yeah you're right, but once your jobs
aren't small anymore and you need more of these features or business
continuity becomes really critical, these commercial solutions are far
more likely to take you there today.
$0.02
Mike-
