[c-nsp] Cisco ME3800X/ME3600X - Any experiences worth sharing?

[Mark Tinka]

On Thursday, January 26, 2012 11:18:04 PM Sigurbjörn Birkir 
Lárusson wrote:

> The ASR903, which afaik uses the same whale platform,
> allows you to have either one or two (redundant) and
> field-replacable RSPs of which two models are
> available,one being pretty much the ME3600X and the
> other which is pretty much the ME3800X in a
> active/standby configuration. Power supplies are
> redundant AC or DC.

I don't know how much the ASR903's are being priced at, but 
something tells me that they will be competing with the low-
end ASR1000 units, e.g., ASR1001, ASR1002, e.t.c.

From that perspective, it still doesn't make sense to me, 
especially if you're not a typical mobile carrier planning 
to deploy these remotely in areas with varying backhaul 
media.

> Different needs for different people, if you want
> modularity (the ME3600X is either all SFP gig or all
> copper gig, and has no E1/OC3/OC12 support at all) then
> the ASR903 is probably your choice, if you want cheaper
> and fixed and don't mind the Copper/SFP choice then the
> ME3600X and ME3800X might be a better choice for you. 

We fixed that problem by buying only the SFP model, and just 
throwing in SFP-T's if customer connections were copper 
(most of our customer connections are on fibre).

If you buy SFP-T's from Cisco, you'll pay a fortune. If you 
get 3rd party modules, it's cheap, and you end up not having 
to stock 2x different models of the same switch.

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/20120126/9ed012cd/attachment.sig>