On 13 January 2017 at 04:02, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote: > > On Thu 2017-Jan-12 22:59:21 +0000, James Bensley <jwbens...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 12 January 2017 at 20:32, Justin Krejci <jkre...@usinternet.com> wrote: >>> >>> . I have not found many resources discussing using a non-router box as a >>> route reflector (ie a device not necessarily in the forwarding path of the >>> through traffic). I am thinking things like OpenBGPd and BIRD could make a >>> good route reflector though they are most often discussed in the context of >>> IXPs (ie eBGP sessions). >> >> >> The CSR1000v (IOS-XE),IOS-XRv and vMX are production ready. People are >> deploying these in production and its increasing in popularity. > > > Any thoughts on vRR vs. vMX for this use case? I see Mark called out vRR as > having morphed into vMX, but AFAIK vRR is just vMX minus the forwarding > plane, is targeted as an out-of-path reflector, and coexists with vMX as a > different deployment option rather than having been replaced by it. I would > assume that vRR should come in a few bucks lower than the vMX as a result, > but I've only previously gotten quotes on vRR not vMX. > > >> Mark Tinka gave a good preso at a recent Nanog: >> >> https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/2_Tinka_21st_Century_iBGP_Route_Reflection.pdf >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLEjOj2fyp8&list=PLO8DR5ZGla8hcpeEDSBNPE5OrZf70iXZg&index=21 >> >> Cheers, >> James. > > > -- > Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com > pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal
Sorry I don't know about the pricing, but the newer vMX product is now split into two VMs, the virtual control plane and virtual forwarding plane. I think the vRR product is still like the "older" style vMX which was one combined control and forwarding plane image. At a guess, perhaps its heavy throughput limited? We have used the "older" style vMX images in the lab (14.something) which is the combined all in one VM, it works fine for us for actual network traffic testing as well as various BGP tests like router reflectors so I see know reason why it wouldn't work as a vRR. I think the actual "vRR" product from Juniper is just a more light weight VM, perhaps someone can clarify the tech behind it? We don't have any virtual RRs in production yet but we are running CSR1000v in lab tests right now which is working fine for us so we'll probably push that out to prod at some point in both scenarios (as an in path virtual router and out of path virtual route-reflector) but that is 12+ months away as we still have lots more testing to do. Cheers, James.
