-nsp on behalf of Mark Tinka via
cisco-nsp
Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 12:32 PM
To: Brian Turnbow , Gert Doering
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Internet border router recommendations and experiences
On 2/23/23 19:20, Brian Turnbow wrote:
> They also seem to w
Recent Juniper licensing model called "Flex software license" can be
found here:
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/license/juniper-licensing-admin-guide.pdf
Sorry for the link to huge pdf, but looks like Juniper now redirects all
my bookmarked pages to this document.
In
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 08:21:01PM +, Phil Bedard wrote:
> The newer software is packaged that way already, if you don?t need SMUs. If
> you want to customize it with SMUs and whatnot it takes a few minutes,
> depends on your processor and storage speed of course.
The question was not
The newer software is packaged that way already, if you don’t need SMUs. If
you want to customize it with SMUs and whatnot it takes a few minutes, depends
on your processor and storage speed of course.
Thanks,
Phil
On 2/26/23, 11:18 AM, "Gert Doering" wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 02:29:13PM +, Phil Bedard wrote:
> XR for a number of years now has had the concept of a ?golden ISO?. It?s a
> single image either built by Cisco or customers can build their own that
> include the base software and the SMUs in a single image. You just issue a
On 2/26/23 16:29, Phil Bedard wrote:
SMUs were a good idea, but not really great in practice. Most
customers I work with do not want to manage application level patches,
just entire images, even in cases where they are just a process restart.
XR for a number of years now has had the
On 2/26/23 16:21, Phil Bedard wrote:
Ok well there are a number those as well. The 55A2 and newer 57C3 also
support a number of 100G ports.
I quite don’t fully understand the “verbose architecture” comment.
I’ve used a lot of router operating systems, Junos since 1999, SROS,
XR, XE, you
:02 AM
To: Mark Tinka
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Internet border router recommendations and experiences
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 05:00:52AM +0200, Mark Tinka via cisco-nsp wrote:
> For IOS XR, it's just too heavy for that sort of thing. Okay in the data
> centre
a bit curious if there was something specific in the config or
other operations that was a show stopper issue?
Thanks,
Phil
From: Mark Tinka
Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 9:58 PM
To: Phil Bedard , Brian Turnbow , Gert
Doering
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Internet
On 2/24/23 19:51, Lukas Tribus via cisco-nsp wrote:
Hello,
for the unititiated, how does the licensing on a mx204 look like for
different or combined use-cases like pure IP edge, mpls layer3 and layer2
VPNs, BNG functionality?
IIRC, BNG deployments support up to 1,000 concurrent
Hello,
for the unititiated, how does the licensing on a mx204 look like for
different or combined use-cases like pure IP edge, mpls layer3 and layer2
VPNs, BNG functionality?
Thanks,
Lukas
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://apps.juniper.net/home/port-checker/index.html
nice website to check port mix capabilities.
-Aaron
On 2/22/2023 5:06 PM, Thomas Scott via cisco-nsp wrote:
Yes - 400 Gbps throughput total If I recall correctly.
The MX204 has four rate-selectable ports that can be configured as
On 2/24/23 11:01, Gert Doering wrote:
I really do like XR, but the update hassles... so having an "image based"
XR ("scp $new_xr.bin router:", "boot system flash $new_xr.bin", "reload")
would have been really nice.
Now, SMUs and "restart only the affected service" is a great promise, but
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 05:00:52AM +0200, Mark Tinka via cisco-nsp wrote:
> For IOS XR, it's just too heavy for that sort of thing. Okay in the data
> centre where we are aggregating a ton of customers and/or Metro-E rings,
> but not out in the Metro. The Metro calls for a more agile OS.
On 23/02/2023 19:32, Mark Tinka via cisco-nsp wrote:
Cisco have lost the plot, IMHO. Every solution at every level of the
network is now a bulldozer searching for a tiny nail to hammer.
Mark.
So well said.
-Hank
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
On 2/23/23 21:45, Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote:
That's one of the major reasons we're sticking with the ASR920 in metro
deployments for all it's faults. They do silly license stuff on the 12SZ
(no bulk, make all the 10G ports work license) but once you figure out
their quirks they do work
On 2/23/23 21:34, Phil Bedard wrote:
The original question was around an Internet border router with 10G
support. We have devices like the 55A2-MOD-SE which is similar to
some other vendor devices (somewhat of a reference Broadcom design)
which we’ve seen be very popular in border router
That's one of the major reasons we're sticking with the ASR920 in metro
deployments for all it's faults. They do silly license stuff on the 12SZ
(no bulk, make all the 10G ports work license) but once you figure out
their quirks they do work quite well.
We did just receive a 9901 (purchased 6
Turnbow , Gert Doering
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Internet border router recommendations and experiences
On 2/23/23 19:20, Brian Turnbow wrote:
> They also seem to want to follow the same route in metro with the NCS540s and
> this global bandwidth licensing bucket.
On 2/23/23 19:20, Brian Turnbow wrote:
They also seem to want to follow the same route in metro with the NCS540s and
this global bandwidth licensing bucket.
You want to turn up 2x100 and 24*10 on a box?
Buy 44 "essential right to use v1 for 10g" and all the shabangs that come with
it that
Hi
>
> So if Cisco price themselves out of the market with their flagship Ethernet
> box
> - the ASR9000 - that just makes it easier for customers to consider Juniper,
> Arista, Nokia, e.t.c.
They also seem to want to follow the same route in metro with the NCS540s and
this global bandwidth
On 2/23/23 14:12, Alexandr Gurbo wrote:
For 10g speeds the best solution is a linux box and a contract with an anti
ddos partner.
Or even a server with a hypervisor running, say, CSR1000v or vMX or vSR
will do nicely. A little pricier than Linux, but likely worth it if you
have a decent
On 2/23/23 13:47, Gert Doering wrote:
Basically they have "fixed" that by making the ASR9901/9902/9903 even
more expensive.
And hence, why we consider other vendors.
I mean, the general rule for networking today, is Ethernet. Even in some
of the most far-flung regions of the world, one
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 09:40:26AM +0200, Mark Tinka via cisco-nsp wrote:
> The issue they face is Ethernet-centric platforms are much more
> optimized for today's Internet, and platforms like the ASR1000 simply
> don't make sense anymore. Why pay all that to get some Ethernet on an
>
Hello,
> Which is why we just focus on Juniper and Arista right now. Cisco are
> still living in the pre-Covid era. Those good ol' days are gone, and
> unless you have the clout to command proper discounts from Cisco, you
> are losing out on better efficiencies with other vendors.
+1... As well
On 2/23/23 08:22, Hank Nussbacher via cisco-nsp wrote:
For an ASR9906 to add 4x port 100G here is the GPL pricing:
Part Number Description Unit List Price
A99-4HG-FLEX-TR= ASR 9900 400GE Packet Transport Combo Line Card -
5th Gen 271,493.78
CON-SNT-A994HGFT SNTC-8X5XNBD ASR
On 2/23/23 08:15, Hank Nussbacher via cisco-nsp wrote:
A fully licensed asr1001-hx (all 8 10G ports operational) w/ 5 years
Cisco Smartnet support - GPL is around $220K. Add your discount here.
Cheap is relative.
The ASR1000 platforms are pretty sexy, but Cisco have out-priced
On 23/02/2023 0:19, Eric Louie via cisco-nsp wrote:
Oh geez, I just realized I left a zero off the interface - we need 100G
interfaces both upstream (x1) and downstream (x2)
That probably changes the product choices a little bit.
Anyone with 100G Internet feeds want to let me know what you're
On 22/02/2023 20:25, zzif via cisco-nsp wrote:
22.2.2023, 5:31, Eric Louie via cisco-nsp wrote:
For a 10G (or maybe 2x10G) Cisco ASR1001-HX is adequate, rock solid and
relatively cheap. If you have more budget, need 100G etc. there are a
lot of other options too.
Br,
EA
A fully licensed
On 2/23/23 01:06, Thomas Scott wrote:
Yes - 400 Gbps throughput total If I recall correctly.
That's right - it's basically an MPC7E line card with a-third of the
capacity, i.e., 1x 3rd generation Trio chip (Eagle).
Mark.
___
cisco-nsp mailing
On 2/23/23 00:19, Eric Louie wrote:
Oh geez, I just realized I left a zero off the interface - we need
100G interfaces both upstream (x1) and downstream (x2)
That probably changes the product choices a little bit.
Anyone with 100G Internet feeds want to let me know what you're using
for a
Yes - 400 Gbps throughput total If I recall correctly.
> The MX204 has four rate-selectable ports that can be configured as
100-Gigabit Ethernet ports or 40-Gigabit Ethernet ports, or each port can
be configured as four 10-Gigabit Ethernet ports (by using a breakout
cable). The MX204 also has
Oh geez, I just realized I left a zero off the interface - we need 100G
interfaces both upstream (x1) and downstream (x2)
That probably changes the product choices a little bit.
Anyone with 100G Internet feeds want to let me know what you're using for a
border router? I saw one reply for Arista
On 2/22/23 20:29, Eric Louie wrote:
Mark, thanks. We were quoted a MX304 for the Internet edge from
Juniper. How has your experience been with it? are you 10G upstream
and downstream? Any IPS on the 10G connection?
The MX304 is not worth the money, for as long as the MX204 exists.
22.2.2023, 21:02, Eric Louie wrote:
For a single 10G connection maybe even ASR1001-X, which is a really
cheap and capable option. If you need more than four 10GE ports then
there is ASR1002-HX, but I would go with the ASR9900 series after that.
Br,
EA
Is there any other platform in the ASR
Eric Louie via cisco-nsp wrote on 22/02/2023 18:29:
Mark, thanks. We were quoted a MX304 for the Internet edge from
Juniper. How has your experience been with it? are you 10G upstream
and downstream? Any IPS on the 10G connection?
Eric,
you're mixing up DFZ routing capability with traffic
Is there any other platform in the ASR 1k family that supports 10G interfaces
and (can be licensed for) 10G throughput and 4M routes?
I'll go look at the ASR-1001HX (is it still being sold?)
-e-
Eric Louie
619-743-5375 Cell/text
Stay in this moment, it's the only one you really have
Take the
hi,
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 06:29:00PM +, Eric Louie via cisco-nsp wrote:
> We tried an NCS-5501 and it was a disaster, in a word. The 10G interface,
> uRPF, source-based blackholing, and routing table depth with Cisco is a
> limiting factor in their product line.
Do not forget the
Mark, thanks. We were quoted a MX304 for the Internet edge from Juniper. How
has your experience been with it? are you 10G upstream and downstream? Any
IPS on the 10G connection?
We tried an NCS-5501 and it was a disaster, in a word. The 10G interface,
uRPF, source-based blackholing, and
22.2.2023, 5:31, Eric Louie via cisco-nsp wrote:
For a 10G (or maybe 2x10G) Cisco ASR1001-HX is adequate, rock solid and
relatively cheap. If you have more budget, need 100G etc. there are a
lot of other options too.
Br,
EA
Hi folks
Recommendations and your experiences with an Internet
On 2/22/23 05:31, Eric Louie via cisco-nsp wrote:
Hi folks
Recommendations and your experiences with an Internet border router for a 10G
Internet connection, with DDoS service and unicast reverse path forwarding.
Brand and model requested, if you have it, and bad experiences are ok, too.
What ever the recommendations, require the vendor to deliver test data with all
the features working together - under load - with a ACL/FIB values that
reflects reality.
> On Feb 21, 2023, at 19:31, Eric Louie via cisco-nsp
> wrote:
>
> Hi folks
> Recommendations and your experiences with
42 matches
Mail list logo
