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

[Mark Tinka]

On Sunday, July 21, 2013 09:14:18 AM Mattias Gyllenvarg 
wrote:

> +1 and I add a me3600x chassie to the mix of wet dreams.

To be honest, I'm not sure an ME3600X/3800X chassis (a la 
6500/7600/ASR9000) would be possible for a couple of 
reasons:

	- Internal conflicts within Cisco, where such a
	  chassis could cause issues with the ASR1013 team,
	  the ASR9006/9010 team, 6500/7600 teams, e.t.c.

	- If they make it a typical chassis with line cards
	  and or SIP carrier cards, it may work out to be as
	  pricey as the mainstream chassis' anyway.

Possible compromise, I wouldn't mind a big ME3600X/3800X 
chassis with fixed ports/slots. So instead of having 
removable line cards or carrier cards, it comes in various 
rack units (6U, 12U, 21U, e.t.c.), filled full of ports. 

Cisco could consider having a fibre-only and copper-only 
variant, but my guess is any operator would likely take the 
fibre-only chassis since they can deploy SFP-T copper-based 
optics to support copper links.

I'm hoping making it a fixed (non-modular) chassis full of 
Gig-E (and a few 10-Gig-E) ports should make it cheaper than 
having a modularized chassis, and also keep other BU's 
within Cisco at bay.

They could even keep things simple by having centralized 
forwarding and integrated control planes (although if the 
RAM on the control planes can be upgraded with regular RAM, 
that would be a huge plus).

Cheers,

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/20130721/01952d56/attachment.sig>