Why didn't they name it 'Turbo' ?
Joe McGuckin
ViaNet Communications
j...@via.net
650-207-0372 cell
650-213-1302 office
650-969-2124 fax
On Oct 31, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 05:35:45PM -0700, Judah Scott wrote:
The datasheet for the new MX 3D
It looks like you're right. This Trio chipset is a 30G chipset (full duplex)
and they have 4 of them per a 120G line card.
It makes sense, they have a 50G (full duplex) chipset on the T1600 core box
and then the 30G one for the MX. Of course they are totally different
chipsets, the former being
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 05:35:45PM -0700, Judah Scott wrote:
The datasheet for the new MX 3D line cards is a little strange. Assuming
that a find-and-replace of KB to K will make it more coherent, this is
an awesome amount of queues when comparing to competitors. However, the new
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 05:35:45PM -0700, Judah Scott wrote:
The datasheet for the new MX 3D line cards is a little strange. Assuming
that a find-and-replace of KB to K will make it more coherent, this is
Oh and on the subject of technical fail, what's up with the naming
scheme of the 16x10GE
On Sunday 01 November 2009 04:09:51 am Richard A Steenbergen
wrote:
Of course the biggest problem with the 16x10GE card is
that it is SFP+ and can't do WAN PHY, so it will only be
useful for simple datacenter SR/LR configurations and not
in any carrier roles.
Unless you're extending
The datasheet for the new MX 3D line cards is a little strange. Assuming
that a find-and-replace of KB to K will make it more coherent, this is
an awesome amount of queues when comparing to competitors. However, the new
FPC/PIC-like card strategy is in 30Gb/s and 60Gb/s flavors. Given that the
I agree, and I am pretty sure the new chipset will encompass and
largely extend all the qos functionalities provided today by ez-chip
chip.
Cheers.
Max
On 24/10/2009, Richard A Steenbergen r...@e-gerbil.net wrote:
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 06:38:53PM +0200, magno wrote:
I repeat, Trinity has
...@e-gerbil.net
Cc: Juniper-Nsp juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 1:00:49 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] juniper trinity
Please have look at the below link
EZchip Talks Juniper
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=179122
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id
I repeat, Trinity has nothing to do with ez-chip. My advice is to stop
elucubrating around any ez-chip whatever.
Ez-chip proved to be quite limited for some qos functions, so I really
don't think juniper wants to be qos feature limited by a third-party
chip anymore.
My 2 cents.
Max
On
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 06:38:53PM +0200, magno wrote:
I repeat, Trinity has nothing to do with ez-chip. My advice is to stop
elucubrating around any ez-chip whatever.
Ez-chip proved to be quite limited for some qos functions, so I really
don't think juniper wants to be qos feature limited
Hi,
does anyone know what is this all about:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/21/cisco-hardware-software-technology-cio-network-juniper.html
They say ...will reveal a new chipset it says is capable of twice the
data-pushing capacity of the current industry record
Juniper already has a 100G
Guys, forbes or not forbes, maybe this time could be even better...
Stay tuned...
M.
On 23/10/2009, Richard A Steenbergen r...@e-gerbil.net wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 08:53:17AM -0700, Marlon Duksa wrote:
Keep in mind that this is from the Forbes magazine - these guys have no
clue
what
12 matches
Mail list logo
