On 17/Jul/20 18:22, Phil Bedard wrote:
> The MX960 obviously came out a long time ago. There have been new chassis
> versions for it as well as the PTX5K to support higher bandwidth speeds but
> it was always called the same thing and backwards compatible.
Indeed. But we are likely 2
The MX960 obviously came out a long time ago. There have been new chassis
versions for it as well as the PTX5K to support higher bandwidth speeds but it
was always called the same thing and backwards compatible.
Can't argue with the NCS 6K, IMHO it was really forced by some large providers
On 17/Jul/20 08:17, Gert Doering wrote:
> But that's actually one of the things that alienates the "not megacarrier"
> customers. There's perfectly working routers, they fall out of love,
> new features are not added anymore, and you're expected to buy 32x400G
> things when all you need are
On 17/Jul/20 00:53, Phil Bedard wrote:
> Fair enough. Every vendor has gone through their own pain with the older
> midplane systems in having to swap out chassis multiple times to get to
> higher speeds. Thankfully with the newer fabric designs we've eliminated most
> of that.
Well,
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 06:53:49PM -0400, Phil Bedard wrote:
> >The CRS made a lot of sense because we had a need for plenty of
> >non-Ethernet links, and both the MX and ASR9000 were too expensive on a
> >per-slot basis.
>
> Fair enough. Every vendor has gone through their own
