[c-nsp] MX960 vs Cisco 7600

[Mark Tinka]

On Wednesday 17 September 2008 09:24:13 Rubens Kuhl Jr. 
wrote:

> Cisco 7600 + ES20 are way too expensive on a price/port
> perspective. Consider distributing smaller Cisco ME6524
> boxes (which is not as cheap as it used to be, but it is
> still lot less than 7600)...

In our consideration for a "small" box capable of handling a 
large number of EoMPLS VC's, the ME6524 came up - but 
sadly, we can only think of it in that function, and not a 
combined L2VPN + IP termination device.

This is because it can only support 256,000 v4 routing 
entries (PFC-3C).

Would advise the OP to look at this if he's thinking of 
carrying full routes on it. If 0/0 is good enough, then no 
worries.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20080917/c3509e94/attachment.bin>