Re: Router Suggestions
On 18/Jun/20 15:26, Warren Kumari wrote: > Ah, because, if you word / negotiate your contract carefully, the > failure to meet the 24/7 SLO can be converted into credit -- either > actual discounts or simply a big stick when negotiating new stuff. > Many years ago I worked for a company who repeatedly tripped over > their own feet - but the one good thing that they actually managed was > to have a good clause in their support contract -- we got free 24/7 > support for 3 years in a row because the contact had a "if you miss > the response time more than N% of the time, we ain't gonna pay" > clause. We had many locations in the USA, but also in Bangalore, > Chennai, Hyderabad, Paris, London, Mumbai, and Marseille - for some > reason Marseille was almost always the winner in terms of missing the > SLO. Conniving... I like it :-). What was the saying... "Huge telco's are law firms masquerading as connectivity providers", or something along those lines :-). Mark.
Re: Router Suggestions
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:26 AM Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 18/Jun/20 00:50, Warren Kumari wrote: > > > A number of customers (myself included) had 4 hour replacement contracts, > which the vendor really could not meet - so we agreed to take a new, much > larger/better model as a replacement. > > > It's one of the reasons we never pay for 24/7/365. > > In many cases for our experience, with sufficient pre-built redundancy, there > isn't much different with 24/7 vs. NBD, apart from the cost. So why pay for > the premium. Ah, because, if you word / negotiate your contract carefully, the failure to meet the 24/7 SLO can be converted into credit -- either actual discounts or simply a big stick when negotiating new stuff. Many years ago I worked for a company who repeatedly tripped over their own feet - but the one good thing that they actually managed was to have a good clause in their support contract -- we got free 24/7 support for 3 years in a row because the contact had a "if you miss the response time more than N% of the time, we ain't gonna pay" clause. We had many locations in the USA, but also in Bangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Paris, London, Mumbai, and Marseille - for some reason Marseille was almost always the winner in terms of missing the SLO. W > > And if a site does not require redundancy, it's cheaper to have a cold > standby than to give it 24/7/365, or even NBD. > > Mark. -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf
Re: Router Suggestions
On 18/Jun/20 04:00, Owen DeLong wrote: > OTOH, I bet if you’d had two of those cards fail, you might > have been SOL on the second one for a couple of days. Quite possibly, who knows :-). Perhaps I should ask them, just to get a squirm :-). Then again, we had enough redundancy built into the PoP to afford a loss of 3 out of 4 of them and still be okay. Mark.
Re: Router Suggestions
On 18/Jun/20 00:50, Warren Kumari wrote: > > A number of customers (myself included) had 4 hour replacement > contracts, which the vendor really could not meet - so we agreed to > take a new, much larger/better model as a replacement. It's one of the reasons we never pay for 24/7/365. In many cases for our experience, with sufficient pre-built redundancy, there isn't much different with 24/7 vs. NBD, apart from the cost. So why pay for the premium. And if a site does not require redundancy, it's cheaper to have a cold standby than to give it 24/7/365, or even NBD. Mark.
Re: Router Suggestions
> On Jun 17, 2020, at 12:50 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 16/Jun/20 23:26, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> Count your blessings… > > I know that we are lucky that in the markets we operate, local depots > are available. There are other markets in Africa that may not be so > lucky. If we ever built into those markets, we'd certainly cold spare as > much as possible, as we used to in the current markets that the vendors > didn't have local depots for 10 or so years ago. > > >> As I said, YMMV, but I’m betting your vendor doesn’t stock a second copy of >> every piece of covered equipment in the local depot. They’re playing the >> statistical probabilities just >> like anyone else stocking their own spares pool. The biggest difference is >> that they’re >> spreading the risk across a (potentially) much wider sample size which may >> better normalize >> the numbers. > > Yes, it's just like a bank - they hope not all customers come to > withdraw all their cash on the same morning. Yep… FWIW, my experiences were in locations in the US with NFL teams and multiple depots proximate to each location. That didn’t help in these cases. > We run a CRS 4-port 100Gbps line card that I know is not very popular > among other operators in the markets where we have them. We had one fail > in a smaller city a few weeks ago. We pay for NBD, not 24/7. A new line > card arrived promptly, the morning after. I did hold my breath, but they > managed. Yeah, that’s far less likely to be a problem than a popular line card or other component that turns out to have a bad batch. Generally, they’ll keep at least one of everything any customer has in at least one nearby depot. OTOH, I bet if you’d had two of those cards fail, you might have been SOL on the second one for a couple of days. Owen
Re: Router Suggestions
We _always_ have at least one spare, or something that could be (relatively) easily pressed into service as one. Even in the Midwest, we've had times where 'guaranteed next day replacement' is more like 2nd or third day due to weather conditions, the carrier routing it weird, or just plain the plane didn't come today issues. We generally laugh when they try to offer us 4 hour contracts -- we know there's 0 chance they can meet them, and they never want to refund you when you need it and they can't. -Original Message- From: "Warren Kumari" Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 6:50pm To: "Owen DeLong" Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Router Suggestions On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:28 PM Owen DeLong <[ o...@delong.com ]( mailto:o...@delong.com )> wrote: > On Jun 16, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Mark Tinka <[ mark.ti...@seacom.mu ]( > mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu )> wrote: > > > > On 16/Jun/20 22:43, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> Covering them all under vendor contract doesn’t necessarily guarantee that >> the vendor does, either. In general, if you can cover 10% of your hardware >> failing in the same 3-day period, you’re probably not going to do much >> better >> with vendor support. > > In my experience, our vendors have been able to abide by their > obligations when we've had successive failures in a short period of > time, as long as our subscription is up-to-date. > > I am yet to be disappointed. > Count your blessings… I once faced a situation where a vendor had shipped a batch of defective power supplies (10s of thousands of them). It wasn’t just my network facing successive failures in this case, but widespread across their entire customer base… By day 2, all of their depots were depleted and day 3 involved mapping out “how non-redundant can we make the power in our routers to cover the outages that we’re seeing without causing more outages than we solve?” It was a genuine nightmare. Huh, was this in the early to mid 1990’s? I had an incident in NYC area where one of the large (at the time) datacenter/IXPs had a power outage, and their transfer switch failed to switch over. Customers were annoyed, so they promised another test, which also failed, dropping power to the facility again... now customers were hopping mad... The next test was *just* of the generator, but with all of the work they had done they had (somehow) gotten the transfer switch *really* confused / hardwired into an odd state. This resulted in the facility being powered by both the street power and the generator (at least for a few seconds until the generator went “Nope!”) These were of course not synchronized, and so 120V equipment saw 0V, then 240V, then some weird harmonic, then other surprising values. .. most supplies kind of dealt with this OK, but one of the really common models of router, from the largest vendor upped and died. This resulted in a few hundred dead routers and way exceeded the vendors spares strategies. A number of customers (myself included) had 4 hour replacement contracts, which the vendor really could not meet - so we agreed to take a new, much larger/better model as a replacement. W I’ve had other situations involving early failures of just released line cards and such as well. As I said, YMMV, but I’m betting your vendor doesn’t stock a second copy of every piece of covered equipment in the local depot. They’re playing the statistical probabilities just like anyone else stocking their own spares pool. The biggest difference is that they’re spreading the risk across a (potentially) much wider sample size which may better normalize the numbers. Owen -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf
Re: Router Suggestions
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:28 PM Owen DeLong wrote: > > > > On Jun 16, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > > > > > On 16/Jun/20 22:43, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > >> Covering them all under vendor contract doesn’t necessarily guarantee > that > >> the vendor does, either. In general, if you can cover 10% of your > hardware > >> failing in the same 3-day period, you’re probably not going to do much > better > >> with vendor support. > > > > In my experience, our vendors have been able to abide by their > > obligations when we've had successive failures in a short period of > > time, as long as our subscription is up-to-date. > > > > I am yet to be disappointed. > > > > Count your blessings… I once faced a situation where a vendor had shipped > a batch of defective power supplies (10s of thousands of them). It wasn’t > just my network facing successive failures > in this case, but widespread across their entire customer base… By day 2, > all of their depots were depleted and day 3 involved mapping out “how > non-redundant can we make the power in our > routers to cover the outages that we’re seeing without causing more > outages than we solve?” > > It was a genuine nightmare. Huh, was this in the early to mid 1990’s? I had an incident in NYC area where one of the large (at the time) datacenter/IXPs had a power outage, and their transfer switch failed to switch over. Customers were annoyed, so they promised another test, which also failed, dropping power to the facility again... now customers were hopping mad... The next test was *just* of the generator, but with all of the work they had done they had (somehow) gotten the transfer switch *really* confused / hardwired into an odd state. This resulted in the facility being powered by both the street power and the generator (at least for a few seconds until the generator went “Nope!”) These were of course not synchronized, and so 120V equipment saw 0V, then 240V, then some weird harmonic, then other surprising values. .. most supplies kind of dealt with this OK, but one of the really common models of router, from the largest vendor upped and died. This resulted in a few hundred dead routers and way exceeded the vendors spares strategies. A number of customers (myself included) had 4 hour replacement contracts, which the vendor really could not meet - so we agreed to take a new, much larger/better model as a replacement. W > > I’ve had other situations involving early failures of just released line > cards and such as well. > > As I said, YMMV, but I’m betting your vendor doesn’t stock a second copy > of every piece of covered equipment in the local depot. They’re playing the > statistical probabilities just > like anyone else stocking their own spares pool. The biggest difference is > that they’re > spreading the risk across a (potentially) much wider sample size which may > better normalize > the numbers. > > Owen > > -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf
Re: Router Suggestions
On 16/Jun/20 23:26, Owen DeLong wrote: > Count your blessings… I know that we are lucky that in the markets we operate, local depots are available. There are other markets in Africa that may not be so lucky. If we ever built into those markets, we'd certainly cold spare as much as possible, as we used to in the current markets that the vendors didn't have local depots for 10 or so years ago. > As I said, YMMV, but I’m betting your vendor doesn’t stock a second copy of > every piece of covered equipment in the local depot. They’re playing the > statistical probabilities just > like anyone else stocking their own spares pool. The biggest difference is > that they’re > spreading the risk across a (potentially) much wider sample size which may > better normalize > the numbers. Yes, it's just like a bank - they hope not all customers come to withdraw all their cash on the same morning. We run a CRS 4-port 100Gbps line card that I know is not very popular among other operators in the markets where we have them. We had one fail in a smaller city a few weeks ago. We pay for NBD, not 24/7. A new line card arrived promptly, the morning after. I did hold my breath, but they managed. But yes, this is one of those things to seriously consider before you go standing up a network in a new market. Mark.
Re: Router Suggestions
> On Jun 16, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 16/Jun/20 22:43, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> Covering them all under vendor contract doesn’t necessarily guarantee that >> the vendor does, either. In general, if you can cover 10% of your hardware >> failing in the same 3-day period, you’re probably not going to do much better >> with vendor support. > > In my experience, our vendors have been able to abide by their > obligations when we've had successive failures in a short period of > time, as long as our subscription is up-to-date. > > I am yet to be disappointed. > Count your blessings… I once faced a situation where a vendor had shipped a batch of defective power supplies (10s of thousands of them). It wasn’t just my network facing successive failures in this case, but widespread across their entire customer base… By day 2, all of their depots were depleted and day 3 involved mapping out “how non-redundant can we make the power in our routers to cover the outages that we’re seeing without causing more outages than we solve?” It was a genuine nightmare. I’ve had other situations involving early failures of just released line cards and such as well. As I said, YMMV, but I’m betting your vendor doesn’t stock a second copy of every piece of covered equipment in the local depot. They’re playing the statistical probabilities just like anyone else stocking their own spares pool. The biggest difference is that they’re spreading the risk across a (potentially) much wider sample size which may better normalize the numbers. Owen
Re: Router Suggestions
Baldur Norddahl wrote on 16/06/2020 07:32: purpose in life is to be a cold spare and a lab router. Why pay someone else for having a cold spare ready for next day replacement when you can have it yourself? e.g. your production deployment might be in another country, and getting equipment in and out of the country could involve customs headwreck, delay and cost. Or you might have only a handful of a specific type of device so there would be no justification getting a cold spare / lab unit. There are lots of good reasons to pay for support, but then again there are also lots of good reasons not to pay for support. It's highly dependent on what you're trying to achieve and there's no one-size-fits-all approach. Nick
Re: Router Suggestions
On 16/Jun/20 22:43, Owen DeLong wrote: > Covering them all under vendor contract doesn’t necessarily guarantee that > the vendor does, either. In general, if you can cover 10% of your hardware > failing in the same 3-day period, you’re probably not going to do much better > with vendor support. In my experience, our vendors have been able to abide by their obligations when we've had successive failures in a short period of time, as long as our subscription is up-to-date. I am yet to be disappointed. Mark.
Re: Router Suggestions
> On Jun 16, 2020, at 12:37 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 16/Jun/20 08:32, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > >> >> Why pay someone else for having a cold spare ready for next day >> replacement when you can have it yourself? Having a lab router to test >> config before rollout has really been a life saver. > > Depends on network size. You can have multiple failures happening in the > same week, and you may not necessarily have all the spares to cover the > replacements at the same time, in all the locations. Covering them all under vendor contract doesn’t necessarily guarantee that the vendor does, either. In general, if you can cover 10% of your hardware failing in the same 3-day period, you’re probably not going to do much better with vendor support. Of course, YMMV. Owen
RE: Router Suggestions
Pretty sure you can via the following PNs. S-MX204-IR S-MX204-R -Original Message- From: NANOG On Behalf Of Jared Brown Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 11:11 AM To: Matt Harris Cc: North American Network Operators' Group Subject: Re: Router Suggestions *External Email: Use Caution* Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 From: "Matt Harris" >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:52 AM Jared Brown >> mailto:nanog-...@mail.com]> wrote: >> My no-effort quote from last month lists just the box at $13,000. Once you >> are all in the total is that 1.5 multiple Baldur mentioned compared to OP. >> >> However, if you google "mx204 price" the first hit wants very much to sell >> you one for <$11,000. Caveat emptor and YMMV. >> >> Jared >> > Not all MX204's are created equal, however. For edge applications, many folks > will want to go with the -IR model, and the -R model is the > fully-unrestricted one. > These will cost substantively more than the base model which has rib, fib, > and vrf limitations enforced. True enough. I was, however, under the impression you could upgrade the license at a later date. Jared
Re: Router Suggestions
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 From: "Matt Harris" >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:52 AM Jared Brown >> mailto:nanog-...@mail.com]> wrote: >> My no-effort quote from last month lists just the box at $13,000. Once you >> are all in the total is that 1.5 multiple Baldur mentioned compared to OP. >> >> However, if you google "mx204 price" the first hit wants very much to sell >> you one for <$11,000. Caveat emptor and YMMV. >> >> Jared >> > Not all MX204's are created equal, however. For edge applications, many folks > will want to go with the -IR model, and the -R model is the > fully-unrestricted one. > These will cost substantively more than the base model which has rib, fib, > and vrf limitations enforced. True enough. I was, however, under the impression you could upgrade the license at a later date. Jared
Re: Router Suggestions
Matt Harris|Infrastructure Lead Engineer 816-256-5446|Direct Looking for something? Helpdesk Portal|Email Support|Billing Portal We build and deliver end-to-end IT solutions. On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:52 AM Jared Brown wrote: > My no-effort quote from last month lists just the box at $13,000. Once you > are all in the total is that 1.5 multiple Baldur mentioned compared to OP. > > However, if you google "mx204 price" the first hit wants very much to sell > you one for <$11,000. Caveat emptor and YMMV. > > Jared > Not all MX204's are created equal, however. For edge applications, many folks will want to go with the -IR model, and the -R model is the fully-unrestricted one. These will cost substantively more than the base model which has rib, fib, and vrf limitations enforced.
RE: Router Suggestions
My no-effort quote from last month lists just the box at $13,000. Once you are all in the total is that 1.5 multiple Baldur mentioned compared to OP. However, if you google "mx204 price" the first hit wants very much to sell you one for <$11,000. Caveat emptor and YMMV. Jared > Yes I too looked into that. And it was not near that price.. Please send me > and email off list. I would like to know where I might find that. > >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:58 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) >> wrote: >> >> We just got a MX204 quote and it was close to 2.5x the price you're quoting, >> with apparently the minimum license needed for full tables, and Next Day >> replacement. >> So if it's really $11K, please shoot me an email off list. Or if someone >> has a better place to get a decent quote for a MX204, or can clarify where >> this quote >> might have went wrong, that would be useful too. >> >> We're also looking at going the virtual router route where we put 2-3 >> servers in a HA cluster loaded up with 10Gb interfaces and running some sort >> of routing software. >> In case you didn't catch on, I'm >> fairly early in running this idea >> through the paces, although it seems like this is a pretty common thing >> nowadays. >> >>>On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:02 AM Colton Conor >>> wrote: >>> >>>For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 >>> router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power >>> supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards >>>for around >>> $12,000. >>> >>>My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price >>> range / port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to >>> take full BGP routes. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> - Forrest
RE: Router Suggestions
> On 6/15/20 8:00 AM, Colton Conor wrote: > For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 > router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad > power supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for > around $12,000. > > My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price > range / port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking > to take full BGP routes. We all like our edge boxes to be not susceptible to any old garbage that might come at them in form of BGP advertisements from the Internet (500 AS-PATH prepends, 1000s of communities, or straight out exotic attributes - just to name a few). So I'd recommend a vendor that has some pedigree in providing facilities to withstand these wild whims of the Internet and ability to normalize/bleach the routing information before sending it to the rest of your AS via iBGP. Examples: RFC 7606 - Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages Max as path limit Max community limit Max prefix per session limit Attribute filtering Etc... adam
Re: Router Suggestions
On 16/Jun/20 08:32, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > > Why pay someone else for having a cold spare ready for next day > replacement when you can have it yourself? Having a lab router to test > config before rollout has really been a life saver. Depends on network size. You can have multiple failures happening in the same week, and you may not necessarily have all the spares to cover the replacements at the same time, in all the locations. But yes, I agree that if it makes sense to buy cold spares than pay for RMA support, go for it. As long as you are still paying for TAC support if it's something you find useful. Mark.
Re: Router Suggestions
I bought three MX204 a year ago and paid maybe 50% more than the quoted 11K for hardware and standard license. On top of that I paid a significant amount for BNG features and scale licenses, but not everyone needs that. The third MX204 was considerably cheaper (half price) because its purpose in life is to be a cold spare and a lab router. Why pay someone else for having a cold spare ready for next day replacement when you can have it yourself? Having a lab router to test config before rollout has really been a life saver. Averaged by the three routers I may have hit close to 11K, not counting the BNG licenses. Regards, Baldur On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 10:57 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) < li...@packetflux.com> wrote: > We just got a MX204 quote and it was close to 2.5x the price you're > quoting, with apparently the minimum license needed for full tables, and > Next Day replacement. So if it's really $11K, please shoot me an email > off list. Or if someone has a better place to get a decent quote for a > MX204, or can clarify where this quote might have went wrong, that would be > useful too. > > We're also looking at going the virtual router route where we put 2-3 > servers in a HA cluster loaded up with 10Gb interfaces and running some > sort of routing software. In case you didn't catch on, I'm fairly early in > running this idea through the paces, although it seems like this is a > pretty common thing nowadays. > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:02 AM Colton Conor > wrote: > >> For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 >> router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power >> supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around >> $12,000. >> >> My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range >> / port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take >> full BGP routes. >> >> >> > > -- > - Forrest >
Re: Router Suggestions
Yes I too looked into that. And it was not near that price. Please send me and email off list. I would like to know where I might find that. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:58 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) < li...@packetflux.com> wrote: > We just got a MX204 quote and it was close to 2.5x the price you're > quoting, with apparently the minimum license needed for full tables, and > Next Day replacement. So if it's really $11K, please shoot me an email > off list. Or if someone has a better place to get a decent quote for a > MX204, or can clarify where this quote might have went wrong, that would be > useful too. > > We're also looking at going the virtual router route where we put 2-3 > servers in a HA cluster loaded up with 10Gb interfaces and running some > sort of routing software. In case you didn't catch on, I'm fairly early in > running this idea through the paces, although it seems like this is a > pretty common thing nowadays. > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:02 AM Colton Conor > wrote: > >> For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 >> router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power >> supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around >> $12,000. >> >> My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range >> / port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take >> full BGP routes. >> >> >> > > -- > - Forrest >
RE: Router Suggestions
As someone who has used VSR (Nokia) and VMX (Juniper) I’d suggest, good luck on your plan to use servers for this sort of routing. If you want a cheap router to handle full tables and a couple of 10G interfaces worth of throughput I’d suggest you would be a lot better off with Mikrotik’s latest hardware offering - https://mikrotik.com/product/ccr2004_1g_12s_2xs Just my 2c >We're also looking at going the virtual router route where we put 2-3 servers >in a HA cluster loaded up with 10Gb interfaces and running some sort of >routing software. In case you didn't catch on, I'm fairly early in running >this idea through the paces, although it seems like >this is a pretty common >thing nowadays.
Re: Router Suggestions
We just got a MX204 quote and it was close to 2.5x the price you're quoting, with apparently the minimum license needed for full tables, and Next Day replacement. So if it's really $11K, please shoot me an email off list. Or if someone has a better place to get a decent quote for a MX204, or can clarify where this quote might have went wrong, that would be useful too. We're also looking at going the virtual router route where we put 2-3 servers in a HA cluster loaded up with 10Gb interfaces and running some sort of routing software. In case you didn't catch on, I'm fairly early in running this idea through the paces, although it seems like this is a pretty common thing nowadays. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:02 AM Colton Conor wrote: > For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 > router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power > supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around > $12,000. > > My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range / > port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take full > BGP routes. > > > -- - Forrest
Re: Router Suggestions
Patrick Cole wrote on 15/06/2020 14:16: MX204's may have gotten chaper in the last year I don't know. But YMMV. OP needs to check the licensing package for the MX204, and work out the N-year TCO. Nick
Re: Router Suggestions
Drew, A 6 Tbps router is a little more expensive than a 2 Tbps router, yes. I was referring to the 7280SR range not the 7280CR. I ended up getting our SR2k's around the same price as MX204's with the help of our friendly Arista rep. MX204's may have gotten chaper in the last year I don't know. But YMMV. -PC > We've been setting up some Arista DCS-7280CR2K-30-F lately and they have been > just OK. The pricing is not at all close to $12,000 though. > > -Drew > > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG On Behalf Of Patrick Cole > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 8:42 AM > To: Colton Conor > Cc: NANOG > Subject: Re: Router Suggestions > > Colton, > > We recently opted for the Arista 7280R2K for peering edge. They come in at > similar price points (maybe a little more?) to the MX204 and are a bit higher > capacity. > > Worth a look in. > > Cheers, > > Patrick > > Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 07:00:55AM -0500, Colton Conor wrote: > > > >For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 > >router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power > >supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around > >$12,000. > >My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range > > / > >port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take > >full BGP routes. > > -- > Patrick Cole > Principal Engineer > Spirit Telecom Ltd > 19-25 Raglan St, South Melbourne VIC 3205 > Desk:0385541391 > Mobile: 0410626630 > -- Patrick Cole Principal Engineer Spirit Telecom Ltd 19-25 Raglan St, South Melbourne VIC 3205 Desk:0385541391 Mobile: 0410626630
RE: Router Suggestions
We've been setting up some Arista DCS-7280CR2K-30-F lately and they have been just OK. The pricing is not at all close to $12,000 though. -Drew -Original Message- From: NANOG On Behalf Of Patrick Cole Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 8:42 AM To: Colton Conor Cc: NANOG Subject: Re: Router Suggestions Colton, We recently opted for the Arista 7280R2K for peering edge. They come in at similar price points (maybe a little more?) to the MX204 and are a bit higher capacity. Worth a look in. Cheers, Patrick Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 07:00:55AM -0500, Colton Conor wrote: >For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 >router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power >supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around >$12,000. >My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range / >port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take >full BGP routes. -- Patrick Cole Principal Engineer Spirit Telecom Ltd 19-25 Raglan St, South Melbourne VIC 3205 Desk:0385541391 Mobile: 0410626630
Re: Router Suggestions
Colton, We recently opted for the Arista 7280R2K for peering edge. They come in at similar price points (maybe a little more?) to the MX204 and are a bit higher capacity. Worth a look in. Cheers, Patrick Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 07:00:55AM -0500, Colton Conor wrote: >For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 >router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power >supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around >$12,000. >My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range / >port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take >full BGP routes. -- Patrick Cole Principal Engineer Spirit Telecom Ltd 19-25 Raglan St, South Melbourne VIC 3205 Desk:0385541391 Mobile: 0410626630
Re: Router Suggestions
On 6/15/20 8:00 AM, Colton Conor wrote: For around $11,000 right now, you can get a brand new Juniper MX204 router. Alternatively, you can get a used MX240 / MX480 with quad power supplies, redundant quad core RE's, and 2 16X10G MIC cards for around $12,000. My question, is there anything else worth looking at in this price range / port configuration? Open to both new and used options. Looking to take full BGP routes. Do you want high-touch or a packet pusher? The MX204 is somewhere in the middle. Extreme SLX9540 and Arista 7280SR will "take full tables" with some FIB compression and route caching. YMMV if they'll actually work in your application, but my experience with the 9540 has been positive in a typical leaf edge application. Street price is in the ballpark of what you're talking, and you get a few 100GbE ports to go with your 10GbE ports. The SLX9640 or 7280R will apparently actually fit full routes in hardware, but the pricing seems to be a fair bit higher than you're talking. All of these are pretty much packet pushers with minimal "touch". In particular, traffic control capabilities are somewhat limited aside from applying them to the port itself, and they definitely won't do "BNG" type functionality with PPPoE or tag-per-customer with shared L2 appearance at least not at any real scale. -- Brandon Martin
