[c-nsp] MX960 vs Cisco 7600

[Steven Mark]

Thanks Rubens,

We need a good pricing on 10Gbps ports (who doesnt!) and also oversubscription support. Moreover, we would like to see 100Gbps backplane/chassis capability (We are still evaluating both products). We like the fact that 7600 has richer interface variety (non ethernet ports) but we get concerned about software stability vis-a-vis JUNOS. Also, in our experience finding junos-certified personnel has been a tougher task than ios-certified personnel (something that would affect opex in a significant way). 

Steve


--- On Tue, 9/16/08, Rubens Kuhl Jr. <rubensk at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Rubens Kuhl Jr. <rubensk at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MX960 vs Cisco 7600
> To: steven_mark_99 at yahoo.com
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Date: Tuesday, September 16, 2008, 6:24 PM
> 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)
> instead of
> large boxes like MX 960; if you really have the density to
> buy MX 960
> instead of MX 240, I don't think there is anything on
> Cisco-land that
> can match that.
> 
> 
> 
> Rubens
> 
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Steven Mark
> <steven_mark_99 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > hello,
> >
> > We are a small ISP based out of Asia and we are
> considering above two products for carrier ethernet
> deployment. If anyone has done a comparitive study or have
> experience (support, feature-richness, IOS/JUNOS stability
> etc.).
> >
> > Thanks
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> >