[c-nsp] ME6524 alternative

[Justin Shore]

Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:
> Cost issues and the relationship wit the local subsidiary; we have
> very little problems with the ME6500, one being the BFD with SVIs
> issue that you don't like either if I recall correctly.

Cost is high but it can cut both ways.  That leads to a long discussion 
for another day and I'm sure you're already familiar with all the 
talking points.

The BFD on SVIs is definitely something that bit me on all my SX/SR 
platforms.  I still don't have a working solution for that problem.

> Are you sure ME3750s are doing good for your network ? We had tons of
> issues with 3750-Metro, a product that I strongly recommend for my
> competitors... we haven't tested ME3400 which sound very nice (but
> doesn't have MPLS) or 4500 with Sup-VI (no MPLS on the software yet).

We haven't had any problems with them.  I just returned from the MetroE 
training course in SJC and the ME3750 played an important role in the 
course.  It worked fine in the class.  I think it's important that 
people understand what the ME devices were designed for and deploy them 
with that in mind.  This is something that I failed at initially.  The 
ME3750 wasn't designed to be a generic DC-powered L3 switch.  It was 
purpose-built for L2VPN termination and some aggregation.  When people 
like myself think that it's an all-encompassing MPLS box then they get 
sorely disappointed.  I was.  But it works well for what it was designed 
to do.

Justin