Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX104
We have pushed MX80 very hard with PPPOE and found the 4k number to be realistic. Of course it depends on what other features you are turning on as well. I worked with Juniper team to perform POC’s and load testing with “real life environments” and at the end of the testing (and based on what I see with several of them deployed at customers) the 4k number is “safe”. The MX104 most likely won’t be able to handle any more subscribers than 4k neither - but have not seen any POC”s or deployments yet on that hardware. Paul On Nov 13, 2013, at 1:46 AM, Christopher E. Brown chris.br...@acsalaska.net wrote: Scaling on the MX80 is supposed to be 16,000 per chassis, 8,000 per MIC and 4,000 per PIC and a 8,000 limit on PPPoE sessions. In order to max out you need 2 MICs loaded with at least 1 port per PIC active for subscriber term at up to 4k per. Also, vlan units and PPPoE units both count as a sub... So if doing uniq stacked tag combo per sub w/ PPPoE you are using a unit at both the vlan and pppoe level per sub and when you hit the 8k limit you are also out of interfaces. I have not personally seen a MX80 with that many active subs yet, will have to see if things run out of juice before the hard limits are reached. On 11/12/13 7:52 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote: Does anyone know how many users the MX104 will be able to handle though? The 4000 user limit on the MX80 was quite low. Does the MX104 have the services port on the back like the MX80? I'm waiting for the CGN Services card which was supposed to be released around now. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Ben Dale bd...@comlinx.com.au wrote: That and I think a lot of the BRAS migration functionality (LNS/LAC etc) was late to the party after being told it wasn't going to happen for anything lower than the 240. On 13 Nov 2013, at 12:51 pm, Bill Blackford bblackf...@gmail.com wrote: My personal feeling is the MX80 wasn't widely adopted as a lower density subscriber box given the lack of redundant REs. The MX104 may find it's niche as a BRAS. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Eric Van Tol e...@atlantech.net wrote: One thing to keep in mind about these boxes is that, like the MX5/10/40/80, the built-in 10G ports do not do hierarchical QoS (per-unit scheduling). I'm confused as to why this is, considering they are Trio-based routers, but I digress. I personally don't think that the astronomical cost to enable the 10G ports on all the low-end MX routers is worth it, considering they can't even do per-unit scheduling. -evt -Original Message- From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of joel jaeggli Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:00 PM To: Saku Ytti Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX104 On Nov 12, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote: On (2013-11-12 20:14 +), Tom Storey wrote: Why so much just to enable some ports? How do they come up with that kind of price? Pluck it out of thin air? The hardware has been paid for, and I know thats only list pricing, but it still seems ridiculous. The question might have been rhetoric. But I'll bite. The BOM on these boxes is nothing, I'm guessing less than 1kUSD. But the volume you can sell them also is very very small, so the margins need to be very high to be able to design and support them. Licensing allows you to sell to larger group of people, people who normally would buy smaller/inferior box, now can afford it, which in turn allows you to reduce your margins, making you more competitive. I actually like it. I wish vendors like Agilent/Ixia, Spirent would sell test-kit with some sort of 'per hours used' license. Lot of SPs have need for proper testing kit, but only will need them very irregularly. And renting is always such a chore. It's same thing there, BOM is nothing, but volume is even lower, so prices are ridiculously high, consequently proper testing is very rarely done by other than telco size SPs. It's one of those things where you work with account team. if the commercial terms don't work out for most potential buyers, then the product won't be successful and either things will change or they won't. -- ++ytti ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
[j-nsp] Únete a mi red en LinkedIn
LinkedIn James Bensley ha solicitado añadirte como contacto en LinkedIn: -- Me gustaría añadirte a mi red profesional en LinkedIn. Aceptar invitación de James Bensley http://www.linkedin.com/e/u96119-hnzyh3s2-3/XqZSB0oknt5cTYQCxwU5LkoQzUifoQRJSaUSlk19WH/blk/I315623415_40/3wOtCVFbmdxnSVFbm8JrnpKqlZJrmZzbmNJpjRQnOpBtn9QfmhBt71BoSd1p65Lr6lOfP0QnPkNd3cOdzkNcQALpj5LsmpxsCQLc3AOejoOdjgMe34LrCBxbOYWrSlI/eml-comm_invm-b-in_ac-inv28/?hs=falsetok=0TeuDZwMQW5601 Ver el perfil de James Bensley http://www.linkedin.com/e/u96119-hnzyh3s2-3/rso/296623456/M8yO/name/41461554_I315623415_40/?hs=falsetok=35oSbj08sW5601 -- Estás recibiendo invitaciones por correo electrónico. Este mensaje de correo electrónico estaba dirigido a Juniper List. Averigua la razón por la que incluimos esto: http://www.linkedin.com/e/u96119-hnzyh3s2-3/plh/http%3A%2F%2Fhelp%2Elinkedin%2Ecom%2Fapp%2Fanswers%2Fdetail%2Fa_id%2F4788/-GXI/?hs=falsetok=31RjKUY1sW5601 (c) 2012, LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043, EE.UU. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX104
On (2013-11-14 06:51 -0500), Paul Stewart wrote: The MX104 most likely won’t be able to handle any more subscribers than 4k neither - but have not seen any POC”s or deployments yet on that hardware. I'm bit more optimistic, as it has double the DRAM and somewhat faster PPC CPU, scale should be somewhat better. -- ++ytti ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MX104
Hi Saku… I hope it really is - but based on the 16k number on MX80 becoming 4k realistically and with only minimal code changes implemented on MX104 vs MX80 I am not optimistic at this point. I really hope to be proven wrong though :) Paul On Nov 14, 2013, at 7:22 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote: On (2013-11-14 06:51 -0500), Paul Stewart wrote: The MX104 most likely won’t be able to handle any more subscribers than 4k neither - but have not seen any POC”s or deployments yet on that hardware. I'm bit more optimistic, as it has double the DRAM and somewhat faster PPC CPU, scale should be somewhat better. -- ++ytti ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Únete a mi red en LinkedIn
LinkedIn Mostafa Abdelwahed Emam ha indicado que eres amigo(a). -- Como eres alguien en quien confío, me gustaría añadirte a mi red. Aceptar invitación de Mostafa Abdelwahed Emam http://www.linkedin.com/e/u96119-ho0ipg0r-6n/XqZSB0oknt5cTYQCxwU5LkoQzUifoQRJSaUSlk19WH/blk/I316121878_40/3wOtCVFbmdxnSVFbm8JrnpKqlZJrmZzbmNJpjRQnOpBtn9QfmhBt71BoSd1p65Lr6lOfP0QnPwTe34OcjoNcQALhkxauBwVcP4Lcz4PejoSdPkMe34LrCBxbOYWrSlI/eml-comm_invm-b-in_ac-inv28/?hs=falsetok=2tkc-8MAVM5C01 Ver el perfil de Mostafa Abdelwahed Emam http://www.linkedin.com/e/u96119-ho0ipg0r-6n/rso/92720738/-ZSm/name/41461554_I316121878_40/?hs=falsetok=1_LQsJB81M5C01 -- Estás recibiendo invitaciones por correo electrónico. Este mensaje de correo electrónico estaba dirigido a Juniper List. Averigua la razón por la que incluimos esto: http://www.linkedin.com/e/u96119-ho0ipg0r-6n/plh/http%3A%2F%2Fhelp%2Elinkedin%2Ecom%2Fapp%2Fanswers%2Fdetail%2Fa_id%2F4788/-GXI/?hs=falsetok=1wKILK3CRM5C01 (c) 2012, LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043, EE.UU. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] per-unit-scheduling, vlan shaping, MX480
Hey guys, What's the correct MIC/MPC combination to support per-vlan shaping? ( the mpc/mic supported feature docs are a bit confusing on this ) We're having success with a MX80 sporting a MIC-3D-20GE-SFP but looking to add a MX480 to replace some aging hardware and would like that same ability. I'm assuming I need a MPC1-Q and the same MIC at the minimum ( preferably a MPC2-Q )? -- Scott H. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] per-unit-scheduling, vlan shaping, MX480
Yes you need the Q flavor to do per clan or HQOS Whether you require an MPC1/2/etc depends on the interfaces you need An MPC1 will support up to 2 MIC with 20 afp, or 2 XFP, or one each. If you require higher bandwidth then look at the MPC2 I would also go with an MPC1E instead of an MPC1 Also will need to know how many routes to support The non R version only supports 32k in FIB. This may be enough, if not then add the R option Juniper has a nice doc to explain most of this http://www.juniper.net/us/en/local/pdf/datasheets/1000294-en.pdf http://www.juniper.net/us/en/local/pdf/datasheets/1000378-en.pdf On Nov 14, 2013, at 5:24 PM, Scott Harvanek scott.harva...@login.com wrote: Hey guys, What's the correct MIC/MPC combination to support per-vlan shaping? ( the mpc/mic supported feature docs are a bit confusing on this ) We're having success with a MX80 sporting a MIC-3D-20GE-SFP but looking to add a MX480 to replace some aging hardware and would like that same ability. I'm assuming I need a MPC1-Q and the same MIC at the minimum ( preferably a MPC2-Q )? -- Scott H. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
