[c-nsp] translated to English: 7600 vs 6500 (Was: EOS/EOL for the 7500 platform)

[nealr]

  David - someone else sent me a private about this - I found a J2300 I 
can pick up for the price of selling off some Cisco stuff I don't even 
have time to use any more. Could be the beginning of a trend here ...



David Sinn wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> You might want to check out the J-series...  It meets the tiny part.   
> Cheap is left to the reader to determine.
>
> David
>
> On Dec 15, 2006, at 3:08 PM, nealr wrote:
>
>>
>>    I've read that three times and the best literal translation I can
>> come up with is:
>>
>>    "Stop strudying for CCIP despite the fact you have one exam  left, 
>> Mr.
>> Rauhauser, and see about getting familiar with Juniper".
>>
>>    I wish Juniper built something tiny and cheap for those of us who
>> must get hands on before being comfortable with a system ...
>>
>>
>>
>> Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
>>> Since we're now building our NG/ME network we had exactly the same  
>>> problem.
>>> Use 6500 or 7600? Until now we were using mostly 6500s.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, here are some general points taken from our conversation with  
>>> Cisco :
>>>
>>> The 7600 will focus on WAN edge features, 6500 will focus on LAN  
>>> features.
>>>
>>> There have been discussions around checking the chassis type to  
>>> load the 7600 or 6500 code, but
>>> there is nothing decided yet (12.2(33)SRA is the first independent  
>>> 7600 release, 12.2(33)SXH will be
>>> the same for 6500).
>>>
>>> Generally, 12.2SR and 12.2SX will not sync. Features will be  ported 
>>> from one train to another on
>>> case by case basis depending on customer requirements.
>>>
>>> 7600 platforms might not support ION
>>> 7600 platforms might not migrate to IOX
>>>
>>> There might be hardware differences between 7600 and 6500 in a  next 
>>> SR release.
>>>
>>> The 7600 will have RSP720, the 6500 will have Sup720-10GE.
>>> 7600-S chassis will be equivalent to the 6500-E one.
>>>
>>> If a 6500 line card is applicable to 7600 customers, this line  card 
>>> will be supported in 12.2SR
>>> If a 7600 line card is applicable to 6500 customers, this line  card 
>>> will be supported in 12.2SX
>>>
>>> Next 6500 IOS releases will have many CatOS features that will not  
>>> be on the 7600.
>>>
>>> Sup2, PFC3A, DFC3A, and "Original" FlexWAN & OSMs (or some  features 
>>> of them) might not be supported
>>> in next releases on both platforms.
>>>
>>> Parallel development in native IOS, CatOS and Hybrid will most  
>>> probably stop around end of next
>>> year. End-to-end deployments of IOS with Software Modularity will  
>>> continue from there.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, in our network we have decided to do the following:
>>>
>>> 6500: Metro Ethernet Access, Wiring Closet, Data Center
>>> 7600: Metro Ethernet Aggregation, SP Edge, Secure PE
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Tassos
>>>
>>> Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote on 16/12/2006 12:14 πμ:
>>>
>>>>> Can anyone answer if the future SP codebase will continue to
>>>>> work on sup720,
>>>>>
>>>> Since the Sup720 is already "a 7600 product", I find it highly
>>>> unlikely that they kill the software support soon. On the other
>>>> hand, where do you think they'll focus future development? It's
>>>> a safe bet that some new features will only work on the new Sup
>>>> ^H RSP.
>>>>
>>>> Also, it looks like the RSP720 (with better MSFC and PFC) will
>>>> cost the same as the Sup720, and when a new, better product costs
>>>> the same as the old, that's normally a not-so-subtle hint that
>>>> one should stop buying the old one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> or if I need to upgrade all my boxes to RSP720, and if so, do
>>>>> I have to throw all my 6500 chassis away?
>>>>>
>>>> According to one of the PMs from the BU, the RSP720 will *not*
>>>> be supported in 6500 chassis. (I asked him if he was absolutely,
>>>> positively sure that decision would hold).
>>>>
>>>> IMO that decision is just bad, bad, bad. Quite a few customers
>>>> have used the 6500 instead of the 7600 because it was the same
>>>> thing, because the 6-slot used the same PSUs, because the 6500
>>>> sat in the data center already etc. etc.
>>>>
>>>> When you have to change the whole box anyway, why wouldn't you
>>>> seriously consider fork lifting the thing for a competitive
>>>> product?
>>>>
>>>> -A
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD8DBQFFgy5dLa9jIE3ZamMRAmYWAKDVL71M0Msmm/w1axL1UDBkA6tepwCdEEq+
> hgFp44W+jfQ4FpwW2jwWIT0=
> =mj1A
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>