RE: Arista Routing Solutions

> We're going to be getting some Arista gear soon and this issue came > up. They made the same noises and vague overtures of "well, you > *might* have problems with TAC if you go with 3rd party optics"... > until I said "Oh really- well, that's a deal breaker, we can't really > even consider

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Timothy Creswick wrote: > Not in response to any point specifically, but the major issue which stopped > us buying Arista a few months ago was the rather out-dated attitude to 3rd > party transceiver support. > > I'm sure there are

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 1:33 AM, lincoln dale wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Peter Kranz > wrote: > >> Curious if you have any thoughts on the longevity of the 7500R >> and 7280R survival's with IPv4 full tables? How full are you

RE: Arista Routing Solutions

> Just wanted to interject, the port density of the Arista switches is quite > impressive, especially considering the price point they're at. Not in response to any point specifically, but the major issue which stopped us buying Arista a few months ago was the rather out-dated attitude to 3rd

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Laszln, Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:47:45PM +, Laszlo Hanyecz wrote: > On 2016-04-28 11:06, Alain Hebert wrote: > > > > Well, > > > > Once you eliminate the ~160k superfluous prefixes (last time I > > checked)... This is a none issue. > > > > Some work on some sort summary

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On 2016-04-28 11:06, Alain Hebert wrote: Well, Once you eliminate the ~160k superfluous prefixes (last time I checked)... This is a none issue. Some work on some sort summary function would keep those devices alive... but we all know there is more money to be made the faster

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Well, Once you eliminate the ~160k superfluous prefixes (last time I checked)... This is a none issue. Some work on some sort summary function would keep those devices alive... but we all know there is more money to be made the faster the device become obsolete :( - Alain

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Peter Kranz wrote: > Curious if you have any thoughts on the longevity of the 7500R and > 7280R survival's with IPv4 full tables? How full are you seeing the TCAM > getting today (I'm assuming they are doing some form of selective >

RE: Arista Routing Solutions

Ryan, Curious if you have any thoughts on the longevity of the 7500R and 7280R survival's with IPv4 full tables? How full are you seeing the TCAM getting today (I'm assuming they are doing some form of selective download)? And if we are currently adding 100k/routes a year, how much

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Just wanted to interject, the port density of the Arista switches is quite impressive, especially considering the price point they're at. On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Ryan Woolley wrote: > While the QFX in general is similar to Jericho-based platforms, I think the

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

While the QFX in general is similar to Jericho-based platforms, I think the QFX10002 is perhaps not an ideal comparison. At 100G, there is a significant density penalty on that platform, as you can use all 36 ports at 40G, but only 12 ports at 100G. BGP convergence in the newer EOS releases is

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

IOS-XR on ASR 9k and Junos on MX. For our use case, there's no longer anything limiting as compared to those platforms. BGP policy is perhaps not as rich as you might be used to if your experience is with the sort of routers traditionally marketed to service providers, but I'm sure that will get

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Ryan, What routing platform were you coming from before? What features does Arista not have that you find limiting that the old platform did have? How does Astira's Sflow only compare to having Cisco Netflow or Juniper JFlow for traffic monitoring which I assume Netflix does alot of? On Wed,

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Hey Colton, Comments inline: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Colton Conor wrote: > NANOG, > > I know Arista is typically a switch manufacturer, but with their recently > announced Arista 7500R Series and soon to be announced but already shipping > 7280R Series Arista

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Colton Conor wrote: > I know Arista is typically a switch manufacturer, but with their recently > announced Arista 7500R Series and soon to be announced but already shipping > 7280R Series Arista is officially getting into the routing game. The fixed > 1U 7280R Series looks quite impressive. The

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

> > > High Touch / Low Touch > > High touch means very general purpose NPU, with off-chip memory. Low > touch means usually ASIC or otherwise simplified pipeline and on-chip > memory. Granted Jericho can support off-chip memory too. > > L3 switches are canonical example of low touch. EZchip, Trio,

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On 24 April 2016 at 09:08, Colton Conor wrote: Hey, > I guess you are right the QFX10002-36Q is probably a better comparison. But > let's be honest, Juniper is not going to sell a QFX10002-36Q for less than > $20k like Arista will do for a semi- similar box. Even with a

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Saku, I guess you are right the QFX10002-36Q is probably a better comparison. But let's be honest, Juniper is not going to sell a QFX10002-36Q for less than $20k like Arista will do for a semi- similar box. Even with a high discount (like 90 percent off list), the Juniper QFX10002-36Q at $360k

RE: Arista Routing Solutions

Got it, thanks for the explanation! > -Original Message- > From: Saku Ytti [mailto:s...@ytti.fi] > Sent: Sunday, 24 April, 2016 11:03 > To: Keith Medcalf > Cc: nanog list > Subject: Re: Arista Routing Solutions > > On 24 April 2016 at 05:14, Keith Medcalf <

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On 24 April 2016 at 05:14, Keith Medcalf wrote: > High Touch / Low Touch High touch means very general purpose NPU, with off-chip memory. Low touch means usually ASIC or otherwise simplified pipeline and on-chip memory. Granted Jericho can support off-chip memory too. L3

RE: Arista Routing Solutions

ng supervision unless you want to change something? Or is it just a strange translation for functionality (as in High End / Low End)? > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Saku Ytti > Sent: Saturday, 23 April, 2016 14:21 > To: Tom

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

Saku, Jericho is in no sense a low end chip, while there are some scale limitations (what can be done with SuperFEC, some bridging related stuff), from functionality prospective it is a very capable silicon. One has to: Understand how to program it properly (recursiveness, ECMP’s, etc) Know

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On 23 April 2016 at 10:52, Tom Hill wrote: > In broad strokes: for your money you're either getting port density, or > more features per port. The only difference here is that there's > suddenly more TCAM on the device, and I still don't see the above > changing too

Re: Arista Routing Solutions

On 20/04/16 15:37, Colton Conor wrote: > Can the Arista EOS software combine with their hardware based on the > Broadcom Jericho chipset truly compete with the custom chipsets and > accompanying software from the big guys? In broad strokes: for your money you're either getting port density, or