Re: Arista Layer3

[Mark Tinka]

On 8/Mar/19 13:18, Brandon Martin wrote:

>  
>
> I haven't used Arista much at all really.

We are currently swapping out our Juniper EX4550's and EX4600's for
Arista's 7280SR switches, but this is purely for Layer 2 Ethernet
customer aggregation in the data centre.

The main issue we are having is getting support for L2PT in the Arista
on par with what Juniper and Cisco can do today. So far, some of the
critical protocols are trickling into test code, but there is still a
little bit of way to go before we get everything we need.

At any rate, it seems there are no hardware limitations in getting those
protocols implemented, and Arista just need to get more people on to the
code to write it all up. So that's a positive, although it is delaying
our migration.

In the core, been using the 7508E for 100Gbps Layer 2 Ethernet
aggregation for over a year now. Apart from some fabric modules that
failed in 2 switches at the same time (nothing really major as that is
part of network operations), they've been solid.

Mark.

RE: Re: Arista Layer3 (Colton Conor)

[Peter Kranz]

These boxes are available with 3 different FIB options currently..

 

7280R > 1M route

7280R2 (Jericho+) > 1.3M routes

7280R2K (Jericho+) > 2M routes

 

On top of the base FIB capabilities, EOS 4.21.3F adds FIB compression and 
2-to-1 route compression features that give quite a bit of headroom for the 
next few years of growth.

 

As mentioned in other comments, these boxes are very affordable, as significant 
discounts from list are the norm.

 

Peter Kranz
  www.UnwiredLtd.com

Re: Re: Arista Layer3 (Colton Conor)

[Michael Starr]

I can't comment on the direct comparison of the SLX9540, but we have 8x
7280SR deployed across our network (just migrated off all the Brocades we
had) and have had amazing success with them.

The number of informational or "show" commands isn't as extensive as some
of the others that have been around for a while and the output of some of
them is a little jarring, but otherwise I have no complaints.

All of my BGP sessions (200-300 IX sessions, 2 transit providers, 28 iBGP)
are fully populated in <10 seconds (i know many of your networks are much
larger than ours).

As for pricing, I don't have list, but for the box, memory upgrade, and
routing license we paid much less than 100k -- Of course the port density

Feel free to reach out directly for more specific information :)

Mike

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM  wrote:
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 21:44:34 -0600
From: Colton Conor 
To: "Kaiser, Erich" 
Cc: NANOG list 
Subject: Re: Arista Layer3
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

So how does the  7280SR-48C6 compare to the  SLX9540? They are the same
Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product
differ in software?



On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:58 AM Kaiser, Erich  wrote:

> Agreed.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:16 AM Brandon Martin 
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>> > How much do these boxes cost?
>>
>> List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports
>> "unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some
>> maintenance/support.  Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme
>> discount from that tends to look like.  I should hope nobody pays list
>> or anywhere close.
>> --
>> Brandon Martin
>>
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Brandon Martin]

On 3/8/19 5:51 AM, Brandon Martin wrote:

On 3/7/19 10:44 PM, Colton Conor wrote:
So how does the 7280SR-48C6 compare to the SLX9540? They are the same 
Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product 
differ in software?


I just realized that the 7280SR is an Arista device, not Cisco. 
Argh...too many similar model numbers.


I haven't used Arista much at all really.
--
Brandon Martin

Re: Arista Layer3

[Brandon Martin]

On 3/7/19 10:44 PM, Colton Conor wrote:
So how does the 7280SR-48C6 compare to the SLX9540? They are the same 
Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product 
differ in software?


I think a 9540 would compare more directly against a Nexus 9k series 
device.  They're targeted more at datacenter switching but have full L3 
+ MPLS and some features useful for carrier applications as well.

--
Brandon Martin

Re: Arista Layer3

[Colton Conor]

So how does the  7280SR-48C6 compare to the  SLX9540? They are the same
Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product
differ in software?



On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:58 AM Kaiser, Erich  wrote:

> Agreed.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:16 AM Brandon Martin 
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>> > How much do these boxes cost?
>>
>> List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports
>> "unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some
>> maintenance/support.  Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme
>> discount from that tends to look like.  I should hope nobody pays list
>> or anywhere close.
>> --
>> Brandon Martin
>>
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Kaiser, Erich]

Agreed.


On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:16 AM Brandon Martin 
wrote:

> On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
> > How much do these boxes cost?
>
> List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports
> "unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some
> maintenance/support.  Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme
> discount from that tends to look like.  I should hope nobody pays list
> or anywhere close.
> --
> Brandon Martin
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Brandon Martin]

On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:

How much do these boxes cost?


List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports 
"unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some 
maintenance/support.  Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme 
discount from that tends to look like.  I should hope nobody pays list 
or anywhere close.

--
Brandon Martin

Re: Arista Layer3

[Brandon Martin]

On 3/6/19 3:05 AM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:

Is there any reason to have 2M routes support for next 3 years?


Full IPv4 table + full IPv6 table + multiple VRFs (BGP-VPN, etc.) plus 
lots of on-net deaggregates could well push you above 1M right now 
especially if your platform also shares that "1M" FIB space with 
next-hop L2 information, ARP/ND entries, etc.  Bonus points for neeing 
MPLS info in FIB, too, on MPLS PE routers.


IPv4 DFZ alone is rapidly growing to where it'll hit 1M for most 
viewpoints without FIB compression, though most end networks can 
probably compress it down a fair bit from that.


2M is the next "logical" FIB scale to target, I guess.  I've seen 1.5M 
boxes, too, though the headline FIB scale is always suspect.  You have 
to look at how other things that sit in TCAM will eat into that scale, 
whether it has static or dynamic CAM partitions, etc.

--
Brandon Martin

Re: Arista Layer3

[Dmitry Sherman]

Is there any reason to have 2M routes support for next 3 years?

--
Dmitry Sherman
Interhost Networks Ltd
dmi...@interhost.net<mailto:dmi...@interhost.net>
Mobile: +972-54-3181182
Office: +972-74-7029881
Web: www.interhost.co.il

From: NANOG  on behalf of Roel Parijs 

Date: Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 0:47
To: "nanog@nanog.org" 
Subject: Re: Arista Layer3

We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista 
announced the full table BGP routing.
Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco 
ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.

When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the 
past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they added 
MSS clamping at the end of last year.

The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM 
mailto:na...@jack.fr.eu.org>> wrote:
Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G

On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
> I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 
> 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much 
> larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale.  
> My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to 
> do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE.  5501 also 
> has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and 
> physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant 
> first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need 
> switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..
>
> David
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Colton Conor]

How much do these boxes cost?

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:24 PM Kaiser, Erich  wrote:

> It would be worth your time to look at Extreme SLX9640 with advanced
> routing license.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:47 PM Roel Parijs  wrote:
>
>> We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista
>> announced the full table BGP routing.
>> Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use
>> Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.
>>
>> When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over
>> the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when
>> they added MSS clamping at the end of last year.
>>
>> The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM  wrote:
>>
>>> Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G
>>>
>>> On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
>>> > I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down
>>> into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to
>>> do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that
>>> route scale.  My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its
>>> architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half,
>>> even on the 5501-SE.  5501 also has no supported configuration where you
>>> have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you
>>> can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't
>>> do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if
>>> that's the goal..
>>> >
>>> > David
>>> >
>>>
>>>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Kaiser, Erich]

It would be worth your time to look at Extreme SLX9640 with advanced
routing license.



On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:47 PM Roel Parijs  wrote:

> We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista
> announced the full table BGP routing.
> Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use
> Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.
>
> When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over
> the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when
> they added MSS clamping at the end of last year.
>
> The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM  wrote:
>
>> Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G
>>
>> On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
>> > I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down
>> into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to
>> do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that
>> route scale.  My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its
>> architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half,
>> even on the 5501-SE.  5501 also has no supported configuration where you
>> have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you
>> can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't
>> do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if
>> that's the goal..
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>>
>>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Roel Parijs]

We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista
announced the full table BGP routing.
Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco
ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.

When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the
past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they
added MSS clamping at the end of last year.

The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM  wrote:

> Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G
>
> On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
> > I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into
> the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a
> much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route
> scale.  My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if
> you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the
> 5501-SE.  5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both
> first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do
> both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG,
> can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the
> goal..
> >
> > David
> >
>
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Dmitry Sherman]

Thanks for info!

-- 
Dmitry Sherman
Interhost Networks Ltd
dmi...@interhost.net
Mobile: +972-54-3181182
Office: +972-74-7029881
Web: www.interhost.co.il

On 05/03/2019, 21:26, "Saku Ytti"  wrote:

Hey Dmitry,

> What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP 
peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and 
another IXP feed?
> Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no 
more ports left.
> The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this 
router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports.

You should compare 7280SR against NCS5500 and PTX1k, not ASR and MX.
ANET is great company, with great people, but they are like 2 years
old in SP market and this is quite visible. It is impressive though
what they've done in so little time.

-- 
  ++ytti

Re: Arista Layer3

[nanog]

Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G

On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
> I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 
> 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much 
> larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale.  
> My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to 
> do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE.  5501 also 
> has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and 
> physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant 
> first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need 
> switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..
> 
> David
> 

Re: Arista Layer3

[David Hubbard]

On 3/5/19, 2:28 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Saku Ytti"  wrote:

Hey Dmitry,

> What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP 
peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and 
another IXP feed?
> Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no 
more ports left.
> The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this 
router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports.

You should compare 7280SR against NCS5500 and PTX1k, not ASR and MX.
ANET is great company, with great people, but they are like 2 years
old in SP market and this is quite visible. It is impressive though
what they've done in so little time.

-- 
  ++ytti

I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 
48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much 
larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale.  My 
big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do 
uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE.  5501 also has no 
supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical 
path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop 
option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in 
addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..

David

Re: Arista Layer3

[Saku Ytti]

Hey Dmitry,

> What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering 
> router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and 
> another IXP feed?
> Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no 
> more ports left.
> The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch 
> have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports.

You should compare 7280SR against NCS5500 and PTX1k, not ASR and MX.
ANET is great company, with great people, but they are like 2 years
old in SP market and this is quite visible. It is impressive though
what they've done in so little time.

-- 
  ++ytti

Re: Arista Layer3

[nanog]

Those devices are awesome, I use those on the same usecase, and
recommend them

(I do not run pim, tho)

On 03/05/2019 07:17 PM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:
> Hello,
> What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering 
> router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and 
> another IXP feed?
> Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no 
> more ports left.
> The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch 
> have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports.
> Will it run smoothly with BGP, PIM, IPV6?
> Thanks.
> 

Re: Arista Layer3

[Dmitry Sherman]

Hello,
What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering 
router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and another 
IXP feed?
Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no more 
ports left.
The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch 
have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports.
Will it run smoothly with BGP, PIM, IPV6?
Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry Sherman
Interhost Networks Ltd
dmi...@interhost.net
Mobile: +972-54-3181182
Office: +972-74-7029881
Web: www.interhost.co.il

On 01/12/2017, 1:17, "NANOG on behalf of joel jaeggli" 
 wrote:

On 11/30/17 13:00, Ken Chase wrote:
>   >Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box.??
>   >
>   >Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer.
>   >control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz.
>   >We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but 
the
>   >control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions.
>   >
>   >the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier
>   >control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and
>   >requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.
>
> Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick 
Bird
> in this case?
this a standard sr that's moderately busy but not exactly slammed, I'm
be impressed if you could triple that at full tilt.

#show environment power
Power  InputOutput   Output
Supply  ModelCapacity  Current  Current  PowerStatus
---  -   
-
1   PWR-500AC-R   500W0.35A5.27A62.8W Ok
2   PWR-500AC-R   500W0.32A4.81A56.4W Ok
Total   --   1000W   --   --   119.1W --

bird had memory footprint going with it as well as some local
modification and we hacked addpath into it a few years ago. filtering
poilcy is something we programmatically generate and interact with via
agents so a traditional style monolithic config isn't that useful.


> /kc
>
>
>   >> /kc
>   >>
>   >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
>   >>   >For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're 
not 100%
>   >>   >yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no 
interaction
>   >>   >between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have 
changed
>   >>   >recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, 
but if you
>   >>   >need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
>   >>   >
>   >>   >I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. 
Multiple
>   >>   >full table feeds without any issue.
>   >>   >
>   >>   >On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil 
   >>   >> wrote:
>   >>   >
>   >>   >> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and 
I'm pretty
>   >>   >> happy with them.
>   >>   >> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but 
I've been
>   >>   >> hearing some negative feedback.
>   >>   >> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista 
themselves.
>   >>   >> (they just heard)
>   >>   >>
>   >>   >> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some 
negatives
>   >>   >> or positives?
>   >>   >>
>   >>   >> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
>   >>   >> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
>   >>   >> 7050 Series
>   >>   >> 7280 Series
>   >>   >>
>   >>   >> -Romeo
>   >>   >>
>   >>
>   >
>   >
>
>
>
>



This mail was received via Interhost Mail-SeCure System.

Re: Arista Layer3

[Nicholas Buraglio]

While I am personally a fan of mikrotik for their ridiculously inexpensive
MPLS features, their total and complete lack of ISIS is a show stopper in a
lot of cases (and makes me sad) and their v6 support is
mostly-ok-but-still-wonky(which also makes me sad) - and ROS 7 has been
"coming soon" in the same way that Apple has been "going out of business"
for 30 years.
The Arista 7500R series has a lot of promise from a service provider
perspective, but the MPLS stack is still under heavy development, but
what's actually there has been solid. What I do like about their gear is
what has typically been true of younger vendors: they listen and implement.
Like Frederik stated, their roadmap is impressively full and my experience
has been that they deliver on their roadmap since it's completely customer
driven. For complicated SPs with lots of RSVP-TE, segment routing, complex
route leaking and other multi-tenant features it may or may not be ready
yet but it's getting pretty close. Interface buffers and other SP specific
things are there based on their chipsets, which is encouraging, and on
paper their programmability is near the top of the heap, especially if
you're using something like Ansible or other access to eAPI (FWIW, we've
been testing some of the programmability on smaller Arista for a bit and
are so far no issues).

nb

ᐧ

---
Nick Buraglio
Energy Sciences Network; AS293
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
burag...@es.net
+1 (510) 995-6068

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Frederik Kriewitz 
wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Romeo Czumbil <
> romeo.czum...@tierpoint.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
> or positives?
>
> We're using the Arista 7280R with Jericho(+) chips as PE routers.
> We're happy with them.
> Stable operation, no serious issues so far.
>
> Feature wise they're still behind the traditional vendors.
> Some limitations which come to mind:
> - reverse path filtering
> - prefix lists are limited to 65k entries
> - unexpected behaviour with route-map community add/delete (it's not
> possible to add a community which would be delted by a previous term)
> - VRF/MPLS/VPLS support is very basic
> - no support for unnumbered interfaces
> - no BGP flowspec
> - no BGP large communities
> - no subinterfaces
>
> On the other hand all of the above (except unnumbered interfaces) are
> already on their 2018 road map.
> Traditionally they focused on their data center customers.
> But more and more (big) carriers are pushing Arista for the corresponding
> features needed by carriers.
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Frederik Kriewitz]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Romeo Czumbil 
wrote:
>
> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
or positives?

We're using the Arista 7280R with Jericho(+) chips as PE routers.
We're happy with them.
Stable operation, no serious issues so far.

Feature wise they're still behind the traditional vendors.
Some limitations which come to mind:
- reverse path filtering
- prefix lists are limited to 65k entries
- unexpected behaviour with route-map community add/delete (it's not
possible to add a community which would be delted by a previous term)
- VRF/MPLS/VPLS support is very basic
- no support for unnumbered interfaces
- no BGP flowspec
- no BGP large communities
- no subinterfaces

On the other hand all of the above (except unnumbered interfaces) are
already on their 2018 road map.
Traditionally they focused on their data center customers.
But more and more (big) carriers are pushing Arista for the corresponding
features needed by carriers.

Re: Arista Layer3

[Jared Mauch]

> On Nov 30, 2017, at 11:56 PM, Colton Conor  wrote:
> 
> Jared,
> 
> Which Arista box do you use for FTTH features? Whats the cost like as FTTH 
> boxes are usually inexpensive, and Arista is not know to be inexpensive 
> compared to something like Calix or Adtran. 


I use the DCS-7050S-52-F.  This is because I get good routed features to meet 
my use-case, and the cost per SFP port was right.  I’m purchasing them used, so 
my price per 1G port (that can also do 10G to uplink/infrastructure) is 
comparable to the per-port price of other BCM based SFP switches, and the 
software quality is much much higher.  I don’t need 10’s of these either, so my 
use case is perhaps unique.

I really need some basic routing support, DHCP relay w/ circuit id, etc.

Ping me offline if you want more details about my use-case.  Once I have a few 
more things sorted, expect a full nanog talk about my problem & solution.

- Jared

Re: Arista Layer3

[Ruairi Carroll]

Their L3 stuff is as stable as their L2 stuff, in general.

MP-BGP and VRFs are a tiny bit bleeding edge/lacking features, however for
plain OSPF/BGP, they're great.

/Ruairi



On 30 November 2017 at 18:36, Romeo Czumbil 
wrote:

> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty
> happy with them.
> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been
> hearing some negative feedback.
> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves.
> (they just heard)
>
> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
> or positives?
>
> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
> 7050 Series
> 7280 Series
>
> -Romeo
>

Re: Arista Layer3

[Colton Conor]

Jared,

Which Arista box do you use for FTTH features? Whats the cost like as FTTH
boxes are usually inexpensive, and Arista is not know to be inexpensive
compared to something like Calix or Adtran.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Jared Mauch  wrote:

>
>
> > On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ken Chase  wrote:
> >
> > Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was
> hoping
> > for better experience reports since last mention.
> >
> > To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can
> handle 3-8
> > full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito
> whitebox/
> > open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?
>
> The 7280 is likely what you’re looking at.  Lots of folks also use
> MikroTik as well if
> the traffic is in the 1G range or so.
>
> I for one use Arista for Layer3 for FTTH purposes as it gives me good
> software/hardware
> support for my features.
>
> - Jared

Re: Arista Layer3

[joel jaeggli]

On 11/30/17 13:00, Ken Chase wrote:
>   >Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box.??
>   >
>   >Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer.
>   >control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz.
>   >We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the
>   >control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions.
>   >
>   >the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier
>   >control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and
>   >requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.
>
> Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick Bird
> in this case?
this a standard sr that's moderately busy but not exactly slammed, I'm
be impressed if you could triple that at full tilt.

#show environment power
Power  Input    Output   Output
Supply  Model    Capacity  Current  Current  Power    Status
---  -   
-
1   PWR-500AC-R   500W    0.35A    5.27A    62.8W Ok
2   PWR-500AC-R   500W    0.32A    4.81A    56.4W Ok
Total   --   1000W   --   --   119.1W --

bird had memory footprint going with it as well as some local
modification and we hacked addpath into it a few years ago. filtering
poilcy is something we programmatically generate and interact with via
agents so a traditional style monolithic config isn't that useful.


> /kc
>
>
>   >> /kc
>   >>
>   >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
>   >>   >For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 
> 100%
>   >>   >yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no 
> interaction
>   >>   >between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have 
> changed
>   >>   >recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but 
> if you
>   >>   >need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
>   >>   >
>   >>   >I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. 
> Multiple
>   >>   >full table feeds without any issue.
>   >>   >
>   >>   >On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil 
>    >>   >> wrote:
>   >>   >
>   >>   >> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm 
> pretty
>   >>   >> happy with them.
>   >>   >> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've 
> been
>   >>   >> hearing some negative feedback.
>   >>   >> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista 
> themselves.
>   >>   >> (they just heard)
>   >>   >>
>   >>   >> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some 
> negatives
>   >>   >> or positives?
>   >>   >>
>   >>   >> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
>   >>   >> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
>   >>   >> 7050 Series
>   >>   >> 7280 Series
>   >>   >>
>   >>   >> -Romeo
>   >>   >>
>   >>
>   >
>   >
>
>
>
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Arista Layer3

[Job Snijders]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:38:53PM +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Jared Mauch wrote:
> > Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G
> > range or so.
> 
> mikrotik support for ipv6 is still dodgy: recursive next-hop is not
> supported in bgp/ipv6:
> 
> https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=123964#p610239
> 
> ...  and OSPFv3 routes with the local-address flag set are dropped:
> 
> https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=51124#p319794
> 
> Between the two of these feature deficits, ipv6 isn't a runner on this
> platform in a SP environment.  Both problems are due to be resolved in
> routeros v7, but the release date for this is elusive.
> 
> Also, the bgp stack is single-threaded and the individual core speeds
> are relatively low, so operating these devices in the ipv4 dfz can be
> troublesome.

And still no support for BGP Large Communities! :(

http://largebgpcommunities.net/implementations/

Kind regards,

Job

Re: Arista Layer3

[Nick Hilliard]

Jared Mauch wrote:
> Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G
> range or so.

mikrotik support for ipv6 is still dodgy: recursive next-hop is not
supported in bgp/ipv6:

https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=123964#p610239

...  and OSPFv3 routes with the local-address flag set are dropped:

https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=51124#p319794

Between the two of these feature deficits, ipv6 isn't a runner on this
platform in a SP environment.  Both problems are due to be resolved in
routeros v7, but the release date for this is elusive.

Also, the bgp stack is single-threaded and the individual core speeds
are relatively low, so operating these devices in the ipv4 dfz can be
troublesome.

Nick

Re: Arista Layer3

[Ken Chase]

  >Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box.??
  >
  >Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer.
  >control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz.
  >We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the
  >control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions.
  >
  >the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier
  >control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and
  >requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.

Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick Bird
in this case?

/kc


  >> /kc
  >>
  >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
  >>   >For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 
100%
  >>   >yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no 
interaction
  >>   >between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed
  >>   >recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if 
you
  >>   >need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
  >>   >
  >>   >I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple
  >>   >full table feeds without any issue.
  >>   >
  >>   >On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil 
>   >> wrote:
  >>   >
  >>   >> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm 
pretty
  >>   >> happy with them.
  >>   >> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been
  >>   >> hearing some negative feedback.
  >>   >> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista 
themselves.
  >>   >> (they just heard)
  >>   >>
  >>   >> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some 
negatives
  >>   >> or positives?
  >>   >>
  >>   >> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
  >>   >> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
  >>   >> 7050 Series
  >>   >> 7280 Series
  >>   >>
  >>   >> -Romeo
  >>   >>
  >>
  >
  >

Re: Arista Layer3

[joel jaeggli]

On 11/30/17 11:17, Ken Chase wrote:
> Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was 
> hoping
> for better experience reports since last mention.
>
> To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 
> 3-8
> full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito 
> whitebox/
> open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?

Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box. 

Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer.
control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz.
We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the
control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions.

the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier
control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and
requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.
> /kc
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
>   >For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100%
>   >yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction
>   >between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed
>   >recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you
>   >need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
>   >
>   >I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple
>   >full table feeds without any issue.
>   >
>   >On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil 
>    >> wrote:
>   >
>   >> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty
>   >> happy with them.
>   >> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been
>   >> hearing some negative feedback.
>   >> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves.
>   >> (they just heard)
>   >>
>   >> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
>   >> or positives?
>   >>
>   >> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
>   >> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
>   >> 7050 Series
>   >> 7280 Series
>   >>
>   >> -Romeo
>   >>
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Arista Layer3

[Ken Chase]

Thx. Rather steer clear of microtik for now however.

Guess I shoulda mentioned a baseline 10G capability at least on 4 sfp+ ports
(I know there's some 2port Microtiks too). Everyone's got gig-to-the-home now,
I can't see how anyone plans 1G PE builds anymore. They'll be obsolete by the
time they're plugged in (10G for any medium sized op is almost obsolete 
already.)

/kc


On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:32:14PM -0500, Jared Mauch said:
  >
  >
  >> On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ken Chase  wrote:
  >> 
  >> Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was 
hoping
  >> for better experience reports since last mention.
  >> 
  >> To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can 
handle 3-8
  >> full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito 
whitebox/
  >> open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?
  >
  >The 7280 is likely what you???re looking at.  Lots of folks also use 
MikroTik as well if
  >the traffic is in the 1G range or so.
  >
  >I for one use Arista for Layer3 for FTTH purposes as it gives me good 
software/hardware
  >support for my features.
  >
  >- Jared

Re: Arista Layer3

[Fredrik Korsbäck]

On 2017-11-30 19:36, Romeo Czumbil wrote:

So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy 
with them.
Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing 
some negative feedback.
The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they 
just heard)

So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or 
positives?

Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
7050 Series
7280 Series

-Romeo



I have a whole bunch of 7280SR in production, acting as peering-aggregators to easy be able to scale out PNIs to the 
CDN/Clouds (where you sometimes needs to add 10G of capacity per PoP per month)


They work just fine. Simple PE-functions, a few hundred BGP-peers in each, full tables, as-path filtering (150k lines of 
config), route-maps and sub-route maps. It is certainly not as flexible and easy to work with as for example a 
MX-router. But on the other hand you get 1Tbit worth of ports for the same price as a 16x10G MX-card.


L3VPN, RSVP-TE which could be major things you need is coming to EOS "soon", 
february i think.

The boxes that is coming out here in Q1 (some even out) with Jericho+ and Jericho2 chipsets should be even better with 
even more tables that should suffice for quite some time, the 1mil limit on 7280SR can be borderline especially when you 
mix in L3VPN whenever thats coming.


Huawei (ce6870) and Cisco (ncs5500) is also selling the same boxes and rumours on the streets are that Juniper will also 
release a jericho-based PE-box.


Also Juniper has picked up alot of slack recently with the release of MX204, which seems for whats its worth be a really 
good contender in the "small but modern router" market which has been grossly overlooked by many vendors for quite some 
time.


Not sure where cisco really is with the 9901, which atleast looked really good 
on the CLUS presentations.

--
hugge



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Arista Layer3

[Jared Mauch]

> On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ken Chase  wrote:
> 
> Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was 
> hoping
> for better experience reports since last mention.
> 
> To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 
> 3-8
> full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito 
> whitebox/
> open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?

The 7280 is likely what you’re looking at.  Lots of folks also use MikroTik as 
well if
the traffic is in the 1G range or so.

I for one use Arista for Layer3 for FTTH purposes as it gives me good 
software/hardware
support for my features.

- Jared

Re: Arista Layer3

[Tyler Conrad]

For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100%
yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction
between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed
recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you
need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.

I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple
full table feeds without any issue.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil  wrote:

> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty
> happy with them.
> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been
> hearing some negative feedback.
> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves.
> (they just heard)
>
> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
> or positives?
>
> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
> 7050 Series
> 7280 Series
>
> -Romeo
>

Arista Layer3

[Romeo Czumbil]

So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy 
with them.
Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing 
some negative feedback.
The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they 
just heard)

So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or 
positives?

Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP
Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes)
7050 Series
7280 Series

-Romeo