So there have been some developments re: this thread.
As it pertains to the both the MX204 and MX10003, Juniper have made the
following amendments:
* EoS = 2023.
* End of new features = 2024.
* End of bug fixes = 2028.
* End of critical features = 2028.
* EoL = 2029.
FWIW.
Mark.
On 6/18/22 15:04, Robert Webb wrote:
I just have one question?
Why are we discussing IP allocations and IANA in an email thread about
EoL Juniper gear?
Something about having more time to fix other softer issues we've long
ignored, since we won't be busy installing any hardware :-).
On 6/17/22 14:47, Saku Ytti wrote:
I can't pinpoint HMC as a bad solution, yes we've had our share of HMC
issues, but we've also on JNPR and some other vendors previously
replaced all linecards due to memory issues, before stacked DRAMs were
a thing, memories are notoriously fragile.
I can
I just have one question?
Why are we discussing IP allocations and IANA in an email thread about EoL
Juniper gear?
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 1:26 PM Doug Barton wrote:
> I don't want to glorify the idea of converting multicast space by
> commenting on it, however you're wrong in several
I don't want to glorify the idea of converting multicast space by
commenting on it, however you're wrong in several particulars about the
relationships around the IANA.
Most notably here is the issue that in relationship to what IP addresses
can be handed out to who, and for what purpose,
On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 at 15:39, Tom Beecher wrote:
> Thank you for calling out the HMC point. I think that alone is worth retiring
> the platforms that were built around it.
> The number of issues related the the HMC memory drivers were out of hand
> early on, and lingered long past the growing
Thank you for calling out the HMC point. I think that alone is worth
retiring the platforms that were built around it.
The number of issues related the the HMC memory drivers were out of hand
early on, and lingered long past the growing pains phase.
I’m sure in the big picture, supply chain /
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 at 21:42, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> I think the more common solution for something like that would be to use one
> 100GbE port as a trunk on a MX204 or MX304 to a directly adjacent 1U 48-port
> SFP+ switch in a purely L2 role used as a port expander, with dwdm/bidi/other
>
Just to put a little more flesh on that bone (having spent about a
decade going to ICANN conferences):
Although organized under ICANN, address allocation would generally be
the role of IANA which would assign address blocks to RIRs for
distribution.
It's a useful distinction because IANA and
When I last got pricing on the MX10003 in fall 2021, I was asked if I
wanted pricing on something with exclusively 100GbE interfaces or with
10GbE capability.
I got pricing for both options.
Putting SFP+ 10GbE ports in a router of that total
chassis+RE+linecard+support contract price is an
>From Juniper...
"you are correct that there isn’t a native 10G SFP+ form factor offered
with the 304.
QSA adapters are qualified (say for example, Nvidia), and from there it can
support native 10G Bidi, WDM, etc. The economics per-port, obviously, get a
little expensive with this
Matthew Petach wrote:
> https://cacm.acm.org/news/257742-german-factory-fire-could-worsen-global-chip-shortage/fulltext
>
> That was the *sole* supplier of extreme ultraviolet lithography machines
> for every major chip manufacturer on the planet.
>
> Chip shortages will only get worse for the
Dave Taht wrote:
> > Then it was "what can we do with what we can afford" now it's more
> > like "What can we do with what we have (or can actually get)"?
>
> Like, working on better software...
Like, deploying the other 300 million IPv4 addresses that are currently
lying around unused. They
>For those who may have forgotten:
>
>https://cacm.acm.org/news/257742-german-factory-fire-could-worsen-global-chip-shortage/fulltext
>That was the *sole* supplier of extreme ultraviolet lithography machines for
>every major chip manufacturer on the planet.
>Chip shortages will only
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 9:38 AM Adam Thompson
wrote:
> [Not specific to the Juniper EoLs...]
>
> I sort of agree with Mark:
>
> I've been sampling a fairly wide variety of sources in various parts of
> the global supply chain, and my synthesis of what they're saying is that we
> probably won't
hat can we do with what we have (or can actually get)"?
Like, working on better software...
>
>
> Shawn
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "Adam Thompson"
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 12:36pm
> To: "Mark Tinka" , "nanog@nanog.org"
I think the more common solution for something like that would be to use
one 100GbE port as a trunk on a MX204 or MX304 to a directly adjacent 1U
48-port SFP+ switch in a purely L2 role used as a port expander, with
dwdm/bidi/other unique types of SFP+ optics inserted in that.
On Tue, 14 Jun
> On Jun 14, 2022, at 12:42 PM, Shawn L via NANOG wrote:
>
> With the current shortages and lead times, I almost feel like I did back in
> the beginning of my career ---
>
> Then it was "what can we do with what we can afford" now it's more like
> "What can we do with what we have (or
Sent: 14 June 2022 17:07
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Serious Juniper Hardware EoL Announcements
> The MX204 is pure shocker! Unless the MX304 will come with a
> license-based approach to run at MX204 pricing, that is Juniper shooting
> themselves in the foot.
Unless I'm missin
age-
From: "Adam Thompson"
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 12:36pm
To: "Mark Tinka" , "nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: RE: Serious Juniper Hardware EoL Announcements
[Not specific to the Juniper EoLs...]
I sort of agree with Mark:
I've been sampling a fairly wide variety
June 14, 2022 11:19 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Serious Juniper Hardware EoL Announcements
>
>
>
> On 6/14/22 18:06, JASON BOTHE via NANOG wrote:
>
> > Saw this coming a mile away. With chips and technology progressing
> despite ability to manufact
This is not covid issue, these parts were EOLd before anyone knew what
covid is.
I don't know yet exactly what went wrong, and may not ever know as
that information may not be available to even many at JNPR.
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 at 19:10, JASON BOTHE via NANOG wrote:
>
> Saw this coming a mile
On 6/14/22 18:06, JASON BOTHE via NANOG wrote:
Saw this coming a mile away. With chips and technology progressing despite
ability to manufacture, I’m certain many are going to do this.
All this will do is keep these boxes off the open market, which will
simply bump up open market prices,
Saw this coming a mile away. With chips and technology progressing despite
ability to manufacture, I’m certain many are going to do this.
> On Jun 14, 2022, at 11:53, Raymond Burkholder wrote:
>
> On 2022-06-14 09:46, Saku Ytti wrote:
>> These EOLd are HMC devices, Micron EOLd HMC back in
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 at 18:56, Raymond Burkholder wrote:
> Could you help me with HMC, BOM, YT?
Hybrid Memory Cube, type of stacked DRAM, with shorter distance due to
stack. HMC was early contender and for some applications superior, but
HBM ended up winning the fight.
YT is the latest Trio
On 2022-06-14 09:46, Saku Ytti wrote:
These EOLd are HMC devices, Micron EOLd HMC back in 2018, no one else
made them.
MX304 is a very different device than MX80, MX104, MX204. Previously
these were single chip very BOM optimised devices. MX304 has YT on
each card, which also means half of the
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 at 16:44, Mark Tinka wrote:
> This chip shortage issue is, I think, being used as a crutch to take the p*ss.
These EOLd are HMC devices, Micron EOLd HMC back in 2018, no one else made them.
MX304 is a very different device than MX80, MX104, MX204. Previously
these were
> The MX204 is pure shocker! Unless the MX304 will come with a
> license-based approach to run at MX204 pricing, that is Juniper shooting
> themselves in the foot.
Unless I'm missing a trick, the MX304 doesn't have an answer to installing
DWDM, bidi, or other fancy optics in the SPF+ ports on
So Juniper have gone ahead and announced the EoL of some key devices
that, IMHO, are nowhere near past their prime:
- MX204 (to be replaced by the MX304)
- MX10003 (to be replaced by the MX304)
- PTX1000 (to be replaced by the PTX10001)
Re: the PTX1000, I know it is a component
29 matches
Mail list logo
