[c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback

[Mattias Gyllenvarg]

+1 and I add a me3600x chassie to the mix of wet dreams.
On 21 Jul 2013 08:01, "Mark Tinka" <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:

> On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 09:27:45 AM Waris Sagheer (waris)
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> > I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I am
> > collecting feedback for the existing deployment
> > challenges on the following platforms so that we can
> > address them.
> >
> > -ME3800X
> > -ME3600X
> > -ME3600X-24CX
> > -ASR903
> > -ASR901
> > -ME3400E
>
>         - I would like to see a variant of the ME3600X/3800X
>           that provides for at least 4x 10Gbps SFP+ uplink
>           ports.
>
>         - I would like to see a variant of the ME3600X/3800X
>           that provided for 48x Gig-E copper or fibre ports
>           in a 1U chassis (I'll also take a 1.5U chassis if
>           times are really hard). Yes, all at line rate :-).
>
>         - I would like to see a solution that allows for PoP
>           growth. We've had scenarios where the number of
>           ME3600X/3800X chassis has grown to a level to
>           justify looking at a chassis (ASR9000 or
>           MX480/960), but the line card costs alone still
>           make stacking yet another ME3600X/3800X a
>           commercially better idea, but lousy for
>           operations. What can the team do to allow
>           operators to grow ports and scale on a per-PoP
>           basis while simplifying operations and keeping
>           port costs down? I've never been drawn to
>           virtual/multi-chassis systems, but... :-).
>
>         - I'm not very heavy on growing the FIB on the
>           ME3600X/3800X systems, but any thought Cisco can
>           put into this that doesn't make the cost of
>           building the units outrageous would be much
>           appreciated. This isn't critical for me; just a
>           very nice-to-have.
>
> In addition to what Nick and the others have already
> mentioned, those are the things I'd like to see addressed,
> Waris.
>
> For me, one of the things that pleases me most about the
> ME3600X/3800X (apart from the fact that we can drop STP and
> extend IP/MPLS into the Access) is that QoS is normal,
> simple and behaves like a regular Cisco router. Additional
> work and simplification in this area (particularly coming as
> close to the flexibility of what software routers like the
> 7200 can do) would be much appreciated. You have no idea how
> much it sucked running the 3750ME as a Metro-E IP/MPLS
> Access platform and trying to do simple or complex QoS
> strategies for customers and the core :-).
>
> Many thanks for reaching out to the community about this,
> Waris. It makes all the difference for us operators, and is
> more of what we would like to see from our preferred
> vendors.
>
> 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/
>