[c-nsp] Juniper M320 vs. 7600/SUP320-3BXL and WS-X6148A-GE-TX

[Clayton Zekelman]

We switched to MX about a year ago.  A pair of MX-240 routers.  

Price and maintenance costs were the factors that drove us towards switching to Juniper.

Honestly, after a year of living with them, even if they cost the same as Cisco, I'd still go for the Junipers.


----- Original Message ---------------

Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Juniper M320 vs. 7600/SUP320-3BXL and WS-X6148A-GE-TX
   From: Tim Jackson <jackson.tim at gmail.com>
   Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:05:53 -0500
     To: Paul Stewart <paul at paulstewart.org>
     Cc: sthaug at nethelp.no,
          cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net

>Same story here..
>
>About to roll out more MX, but so far so good...
>
>On Jul 28, 2010 3:15 PM, "Paul Stewart" <paul at paulstewart.org> wrote:
>
>Yes, I'd like to throw in that we are migrating to pure MX in our core ..
>and moving out of 7600 platform (sup720-3bxl).  This is partly price related
>although BGP performance (scanner) was the driving force on this decision.
>Also, for MPLS the price/features to deploy was much more attractive to us
>on the MX series too.
>
>We have some of the MX up and running now and extremely pleased in
>comparison.  Juniper isn't perfect nor is Cisco - for our needs the move to
>MX for core BGP/MPLS appears to have been a really good choice.
>
>Paul
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
>[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck....
>_______________________________________________
>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/