[c-nsp] 7600 vs MX experience?

[Paul Stewart]

Hi Rubens...

Sorry if this is sidetracking the conversation a bit - apologies.  But, what
can folks tell me about shared support in general?  I always thought it was
Smartnet or nothing hence why I'm asking... is this "3rd party Cisco
support" that I've seen advertised a few times?

With "shared smartnet", do you lose the ability to contact TAC directly?
What about software updates - from Cisco or from the partner??

Thanks very much,

Paul Stewart




-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl Jr.
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 3:05 PM
To: Kris Price
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7600 vs MX experience?

On a recent event I could meet with lots of people from carriers of
all sizes in the LAC region, so I will summarize based on the overall
experience:
- There were far more stories of instability on the 7600 than on
Juniper, even from those that uses both as Ps and PEs. I can't precise
whether the Junipear gear was M-, MX- or T- series. IOS versions that
solved that bug that was annoying but introduced some different bugs
of their own were also a popular quote.
-  On the other hand, people with simpler 7600 configurations had less
problems and could use more IOS versions that the others. That's my
direct experience: with no FlexWAN, OSMs or ES-20s service cards, you
have much more flexibility in adopting newer software and has fewer
bugs to deal with.
- Support experience with Cisco from carriers that had either Cisco
SmartNET contracts or Cisco Shared Support from one Cisco Partner
(let's name them and reward their good service: NEC) was rather good,
but other Cisco Shared Support partners were awful at supporting
carrier needs. Support experience with Juniper was good whether they
called a partner(the same partner serves most or all of Juniper
carrier customers in the region)  or Juniper directly.

Based on that experience, may I suggest some ideas  ?
1) If you are going to avoid using 7600 with service cards, then don't
get a 7600. Get a ME6500 or some other Catalyst with the port density
you need. No VPLS, some restrictions on EoMPLS (port or subinterface
but no VLAN-based EoMPLS), but they cost much less, are stable and
made by a friendly BU. ME6500 has H-VPLS, so you can provide VPLS
services if you have a VPLS concentrator somewhere, which then would
be a pricier 7600, or a Juniper with low port density (M7i-2GE for
instance).
2) If you buy Cisco gear and don't know wether you Shared Support
partner will do a good job, buy some boxes with SmartNET and some
boxed with Shared Support for the 2nd year. On the 1st year you will
probably get SmarNET because of Cisco sales policies, so you will
already have a quality to compare to. From 2nd year on, Shared Support
will be much cheaper and you will be tempted to buy all support in
this flavor, but beware of the provider you don't know yet.
3)  Think a lot before doing VPLS services, as the customer may think
it's good due to no subnetting or renumbering, but point-to-multipoint
is something that I really prefer to see routed. IP VPN with Multicast
can probably fit most customer needs instead of VPLS.


Rubens



On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 1:00 AM, Kris Price <cisco-nsp at punk.co.nz> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're looking at 7600 + RSP720 platform and the MX from Juniper for our
MPLS
> needs and I was interested in hearing feedback from people about their
> experiences - both positive and negative - with either platforms.
>
> Whatever is selected will be used both as Ps and PEs w/ all 10GE on the
core
> side. This is a fairly large (continental) deployment, and it will set the
> standard internationally for this customer. Main use will be for IP VPN
and
> EoMPLS, but VPLS may show up in the future too.
>
> Looks like they both will work for our needs. So what it really comes down
> to is important things like *stability*, support experience, etc.
>
> Please contact me off list if you'd rather not express something in
public.
>
> Feedback is very much appreciated. :)
>
> Cheers
> Kris
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.4.5/1537 - Release Date: 7/6/2008
5:26 AM