On May 14, 2007, at 7:57 PM, Donald Stahl wrote:
I'm very happy about the Juniper devices I manage. They're
expensive but
very reliable, and their config interface has lots of unique
features.
Juniper's greatest asset over Cisco is the single software image
for all their systems. In my
M7i is a very, very attractive lab/spare box, but this company wants
carrier class - dual engine M10i are the minimum.
An M10i will handle a full routing table just fine. Note that as with
other hardware based forwarding boxes memory on the RE is just one of
several resources you need to
I don't know much about Juniper but I'm about to learn with a new job.
If I'm going to take full routes from a couple of upstreams and have a
couple of peers will the M10i (768M max) be enough or is the M20 (2048M
max) a better choice. Layout here is such that I'd expect to use a
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: I don't know much about Juniper but I'm about to learn
: with a new job.
If your experience is like mine, you'll fall in love with the M-series and
absolutely despise the E-series (Unisphere)
: If I'm going to take full routes from a couple of upstreams
: and
Strange. My rep always took pride in the fact that M- and T- series
devices have no overcommit at all.. Maybe things changed, we use no
quad-gig.
Many of Junipers cards for the M7/M10 are oversubscribed- just look at
their pdf's on the subject:
If I remember correctly from M5/M10, they uses FEB (built-into-Chassis
FPC version), and each FEB (row) has restriction up to 3.6Gbps rate.
So total aggregated bandwidth can not go over this limit.
If you install 4GE (4 of 1-port GigE PIC) in same FEB row, you can use
0.9Gbps in average per
I don't know much about Juniper but I'm about to learn with a new job.
If I'm going to take full routes from a couple of upstreams and have a
couple of peers will the M10i (768M max) be enough or is the M20 (2048M
max) a better choice. Layout here is such that I'd expect to use a
single
On 13-May-2007, at 15:33, Neal Rauhauser wrote:
I don't know much about Juniper but I'm about to learn with a new
job. If I'm going to take full routes from a couple of upstreams
and have a couple of peers will the M10i (768M max) be enough or is
the M20 (2048M max) a better choice.
I
M7i is a very, very attractive lab/spare box, but this company wants
carrier class - dual engine M10i are the minimum.
John Crain wrote:
You might even consider the m7i they can use the same cards
JC
On May 13, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
On 13-May-2007, at 15:33, Neal
I don't know much about Juniper but I'm about to learn with a new job. If
I'm going to take full routes from a couple of upstreams and have a couple of
peers will the M10i (768M max) be enough or is the M20 (2048M max) a better
choice. Layout here is such that I'd expect to use a single quad
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Donald Stahl wrote:
I don't know much about Juniper but I'm about to learn with a new job. If
I'm going to take full routes from a couple of upstreams and have a couple
of
peers will the M10i (768M max) be enough or is the M20 (2048M max) a better
choice.
choice. Layout here is such that I'd expect to use a single quad gigabit port
ethernet blade in each of a pair of M10i/M20 to achieve redundancy.
he said 'blade' to which I read '4 pics in a FPC'... maybe it's a
terminology thing? Neal?
The M10i doesn't have an FPC blade per se (it's built
12 matches
Mail list logo
