On 17/Nov/15 13:00, Tom Marcoen wrote:
> Mark
>
> That is a valid point but the company I work for already only uses Cisco for
> its routing/switching devices. So it's also a non-issue.
Fair enough, then.
The other point, for me, is making sure easy ring topologies you would
build on the
We're currently also using ASR9010 as core routers with ME3600X as the access
"switches" but are now looking at replacing the ME3600X with ASR9000v extension
shelfs. Does anyone have any experience with this setup?
At first side it looks nice and (a bit) cheaper but I noticed the ASR9000v
On 17/Nov/15 12:49, Tom Marcoen wrote:
> We're currently also using ASR9010 as core routers with ME3600X as the access
> "switches" but are now looking at replacing the ME3600X with ASR9000v
> extension shelfs. Does anyone have any experience with this setup?
>
> At first side it looks nice
@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment
Simplification Feedback
On 17/Nov/15 12:49, Tom Marcoen wrote:
> We're currently also using ASR9010 as core routers with ME3600X as the access
> "switches" but are now looking at repla
Even not considering vendor-lock you will have less options from said
supplier if you expect to use this as a universal solution.
The ASR920 series has many variants, I am capitalizing on this for our
topology.
There will always, I find, be the Odd ball requirement that makes these
kind of
On 17/11/15 11:05, Mark Tinka wrote:
> The other point, for me, is making sure easy ring topologies you would
> build on the ME3600X/ASR920 using IP/MPLS can be replicated using
> satellites. There will be a temptation not to build satellites as
> point-to-point, but rather, as rings, and you
On Friday, July 26, 2013 04:08:15 PM sth...@nethelp.no
wrote:
Amen. Number of 1G ports, number of 10G ports,
stackability: Cisco has a pretty significant hole in
their metro portfolio there. Chassis based 6500/7600 is
*not* the answer.
Cisco are certainly a step ahead of Juniper (Brocade
However, in order to turn on 250 MDT routes,
we have to drop the IPv4 routes down to 12,000.
A reasonable use-case for a larger FIB in this platform family :-).
We've gone through the same disappointment so I'm waiting for the
mLDP/NG-MVPN support.
Yes however the bigger FIB would be
Regarding the lack of 10GigE ports + 1GigE ports density, my first question
when I saw this platform was: Is it stackable?
It would be great if the new version of X(CX) is stackable.
Yes so far we use 2x CX to redundantly connect a 10GE ring to the city POP.
However we don't really need
Hi there Waris,
We've got quite a few of the ME3600's deployed now, which we migrated to over
and above a legacy 3750ME estate. The big point for us was to migrate to MPLS
access rather than have any spanning tree knocking about in the Core.
Favoured points from my team involves the ease of
Good point, SDM is just another gotcha. Allocate according to use and
complain in the log when your getting close to max.
ME3600x + ASR9k FTW! Just make more physical variants of the ME and lower
the price on ASR9k.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Leigh Harrison
+1 on last comment
2013/7/25 Mattias Gyllenvarg matt...@gyllenvarg.se
Good point, SDM is just another gotcha. Allocate according to use and
complain in the log when your getting close to max.
ME3600x + ASR9k FTW! Just make more physical variants of the ME and lower
the price on ASR9k.
On Thursday, July 25, 2013 12:56:52 PM Leigh Harrison wrote:
I would also like to see more horsepower in the systems.
We recently went to implement multicasting in VRF and
ran into some odd challenges. We have the 3600's set
up for routing and are about to push 24,000 IPv4 routes.
In
@puck.nether.net
Cc: Waris Sagheer wa...@cisco.commailto:wa...@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment
Simplification Feedback
On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 09:27:45 AM Waris Sagheer (waris)
wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I
On Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:29:01 PM Waris Sagheer (waris)
wrote:
Hi Mark,
Hello Waris.
- 48 gig port switch requirement, I suppose you also need
4x10Gig uplink along with 48 Gig port, correct?
Yes, we'd need at least 4x 10Gbps uplink SPF+ ports for a
switch that came with 48x Gig-E
On Monday, July 22, 2013 04:23:31 AM Stephen Fulton wrote:
I'll add my +1 to Mark's suggestions, and request more
10GE ports. We're receiving more requests for 10GE
(mostly sub-rate, some line-rate) from our customers and
offers from our carrier suppliers for the same. The
3600X-24CX fits
+1 and I add a me3600x chassie to the mix of wet dreams.
On 21 Jul 2013 08:01, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 09:27:45 AM Waris Sagheer (waris)
wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I am
collecting feedback for the existing
On Sunday, July 21, 2013 09:14:18 AM Mattias Gyllenvarg
wrote:
+1 and I add a me3600x chassie to the mix of wet dreams.
To be honest, I'm not sure an ME3600X/3800X chassis (a la
6500/7600/ASR9000) would be possible for a couple of
reasons:
- Internal conflicts within Cisco, where
On 21 July 2013 15:47, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
I'm hoping making it a fixed (non-modular) chassis full of
Gig-E (and a few 10-Gig-E) ports should make it cheaper than
having a modularized chassis, and also keep other BU's
within Cisco at bay.
Maybe an ME version of the
On Sunday, July 21, 2013 04:55:16 PM Aled Morris wrote:
Maybe an ME version of the 4500-X would be cool.
The multi-rate nature of the 4500-X Ethernet ports would
make a corresponding chassis-based ME3600X/3800X pricey, I
presume.
I'd be happy with a Gig-E-only ME3600X/3800X chassis
...@seacom.mumailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Date: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:34 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
cisco-nsp@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc: Waris Sagheer wa...@cisco.commailto:wa...@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX
On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 09:27:45 AM Waris Sagheer (waris)
wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I am
collecting feedback for the existing deployment
challenges on the following platforms so that we can
address them.
-ME3800X
-ME3600X
-ME3600X-24CX
Hi Everyone,
I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I am collecting feedback for the
existing deployment challenges on the following platforms so that we can
address them.
-ME3800X
-ME3600X
-ME3600X-24CX
-ASR903
-ASR901
-ME3400E
* What can Cisco do to simplify the deployment of
On 19/03/2013 07:27, Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote:
* What can Cisco do to simplify the deployment of the above products? Any
inputs?
the CLI that was designed for interface label (e.g. mpls and .1q)
management is hard. In particular, it takes some effort to work out what
labels are pushed
On 19/03/13 12:16, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Waris,
I would 2nd Nick on these points;
* Do you want to see Product Design Guide covering Platform best practices?
Solution based example configuration?
yes, very much so, e.g.:
- internal architecture design like Cisco publishes for e.g. the
Hi Waris,
On 19.03.13 08:27 Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I am collecting feedback for the
existing deployment challenges on the following platforms so that we can
address them.
[...]
* How are you using
26 matches
Mail list logo
