[c-nsp] Brocade Vs Cisco

[Mark Tinka]

On Sunday, August 14, 2011 10:04:17 AM Scott Granados wrote:

> You know that's interesting, I've been following this
> thread but I totally agree with you.  I very much like
> Juniper on the core side and I really like their
> switches...

Really? We use Juniper's EX3200/4200 products, and have had 
tons and tons of (software) problems since inception. Truth 
be told, it was Juniper's first foray into the switching 
space, and the whole of Junos 9 which launched the platform 
was basically a waste of time for even the most basic of 
features. In this space, Cisco spoilt us.

The EX3200/4200 have certainly gotten better and easier to 
use with Junos 10, but we've come across strange hardware 
problems that can't be solved by software, it's quite sad. 
In one case, we had to swap out EX4200's with Cisco's new 
ME3600X's (Layer 2 only).

I haven't played with the EX8200 (chassis model) much, but 
you can find both good and bad feedback about them on the 
'j-nsp' mailing list. In general, they seem to be a little 
better than the 1U models.

Moreover, the EX was what finally showed that the single 
Junos advantage Juniper have been pushing really isn't 
feasible. And you know what, this isn't necessarily a bad 
thing.

> but it's hard to beat devices like the 7200 for
> circuit aggregation at the edges.

Here, I have to agree. When it comes to non-Ethernet 
aggregation, the 7200 is great. We even choose it before the 
ASR1000, as it's unlikely a dedicated non-Ethernet NPE-G2 
aggregation box will be running out of steam anytime soon.

But then again, Juniper haven't had a strong competitor in 
this space. Non-Ethernet support on the M7i/M10i is present, 
but the 7200 simply does a better job.

One area where Juniper need to quickly beef up is something 
to compete against the ASR1000. Juniper still don't have a 
box that will do 100Mbps, 1Gbps, 10Gbps and non-Ethernet at 
a reasonable $$ value. This is where the ASR1000 is cleaning 
house. I hear something is in the works, but the market is 
moving. 

For the Metro-E Access, Juniper fell short on the MX80, 
IMHO. They had such a huge opportunity there to eat up lots 
of Cisco, Huawei and ALU business. They need a 1U platform 
that is a proper Metro-E Access platform in terms of price, 
port density and features. Something is in the works, I 
hear.

> Another place where I
> think Cisco wins hands down is on the VPN side.  I
> really got to dig in to the ASA product line during my
> last gig and with some help from some really skilled
> folks on this list I really got pretty good with the
> devices pretty fast.  I've used te Juniper SRX line for
> similar functions and the ASA just makes more sense, at
> least to me.

Not so heavy on the VPN side of things here. A couple of 
2811's running IPSec/VPN's makes us happy. But if the market 
is anything to go by, the Netscreen's and SSG's have been 
very good VPN platforms, so I guess Juniper did something 
right there.

From what I've been seeing on the 'j-nsp', the SRX is quite 
formidable but has been plagued by numerous software 
problems. Those seem to be getting cleared up, and I think 
this platform stands to be a serious force in the future. 

> I just wish Cisco was wirespeed more than they are.  I
> don't see providing someone a gig interface but only be
> able to forward at a 3rd of that rate. Juniper does
> better in this area...

You need to consider the platforms and their generation when 
comparing raw forwarding performance. 

If you look at the late '90's and early 2000's, Cisco were 
playing catch-up to Juniper for high-end forwarding. 
However, Cisco's ASR1000, ASR9000 and CRS are a good match 
for Juniper's M-, MX- and T-series routers, especially if 
you're looking at the advances both vendors have made in the 
last 3 - 4 years.

That's why it was much easier for us to make a decision on 
which vendor to take as early back as 2005, purely on 
performance; but in 2011, it really isn't that easy to judge 
purely on performance. As I said before, not much technical 
difference for us, today, if we have a Juniper or Cisco in 
the network.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20110814/227a3919/attachment-0001.pgp>