[c-nsp] 3750X?

[Mateusz Blaszczyk]

Anyone looked at Extreme X480s ?
I would wonder about their limitations in MPLS to the access environment.

Best Regards,

-mat

On 18 April 2010 21:48, Phil Bedard <philxor at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've seen a presentation on them but that was over a year ago, and there were a lot of things "coming" which weren't there yet.
>
> We've been looking at the ALU SAS-M platform recently.   They are 24xSFP and have models with 2x10GE and CES modules as well.  They support OSPF/ISIS/LDP/RSVP-TE (1:1 FRR only) but do not have much routing capability (16K routes max right now) but if you are looking to extend VLL/VPLS services they may work for most folks.   The pricing on them is pretty good too.   Not sure on IPv6 support, think it's a roadmap item.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On Apr 18, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
>
>> Anyone got any experience with Huawei's CX600?
>>
>> Two smaller models (X1 and X2) are coming out and they seem promising enough.
>> http://www.huawei.com/news/view.do?id=11153&cid=42
>>
>> --
>> Tassos
>>
>> Mark Tinka wrote on 18/04/2010 16:17:
>>> On Thursday 15 April 2010 07:54:13 pm Anton Kapela wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc,
>>>>  consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and
>>>>  actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not
>>>>  "somewhere over the me3400G rainbow."
>>>>
>>> I had a chance to beat these boxes a fair bit toward the end
>>> of last year, during our consideration for platforms that
>>> will let us extend MPLS into the Access.
>>>
>>> While they are formidable (Cisco's ME3400 is pretty useless
>>> for MPLS in the Access, their 3750ME lacks Gig-E + Jumbo
>>> frames on customer facing ports, e.t.c., Juniper's EX-series
>>> boxes are pretty useless in this field too, and the MX80 is
>>> worthy but too pricey/big), there's a number of issues that
>>> still need sorting out (some may, some may never).
>>>
>>> While I can't get into the specifics of these limitations
>>> (NDA, blah blah), you'll definitely be chasing the code for
>>> at least another couple of years to reach parity with the
>>> rest of your network.
>>>
>>> Hot on my list: IPv6 is currently not supported, but is
>>> roadmapped for the future (feature by feature, of course).
>>>
>>> All that said, in all honesty, if you can live with the
>>> limitations or workaround them, there currently isn't a
>>> better product in the market that offers 48-port tri-rate
>>> copper, fibre-based Gig-E/10-Gig-E connections with
>>> "acceptable" MPLS support, especially if you're considering
>>> just EoMPLS and VPLS. And coming from me, that's probably
>>> saying much :-)...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>