[c-nsp] ASR vs 6807

[Mattias Gyllenvarg]

Disregarding price, the only real issue with the ASR9k platform is the
software upgrade procedure. *shudder*

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:37 PM, R LAS <dim0sal at hotmail.com> wrote:

> DCs are 40 km away...
>
> QFX5100 is the competitor, but on the DC-LAN, not on the DCI....
>
> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR vs 6807
> > From: andrew at 2sheds.de
> > Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 22:39:03 +1100
> > CC: simon at slimey.org; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > To: dim0sal at hotmail.com
> >
> > The 6800 is a l3 switch. The ASR9k is a full blown router.
> >
> > If you need to connect to non Ethernet circuits you will need a router.
> If you want real qos you will need a router.
> >
> > How far are the DCs apart?
> >
> > Inter dc l2 is never a great idea if it can be avoided.
> >
> > You may also want to look at the qfx51000
> >
> > Sent from a mobile device
> >
> > > On 27 Nov 2014, at 22:05, R LAS <dim0sal at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Simon
> > > can you detail more "ASR9k can be more flexible on EoMPLS (VPLS) than
> 6807" ?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > >> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 10:26:55 +0000
> > >> From: simon at slimey.org
> > >> To: dim0sal at hotmail.com
> > >> CC: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > >> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR vs 6807
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu Nov 27, 2014 at 10:18:41AM +0000, R LAS wrote:
> > >>> Discussing a new architecture of DCI (Data Center Interconnection),
> Cisco
> > >>> raccomends both ASR9k and 6807.  The architecture requested by the
> customer
> > >>> forecast MPLS/VPLS supported by DCI.
> > >>>
> > >>> From pricing point of view there is a quite big difference (win
> 6807), from
> > >>> feature point of view Cisco says the difference is "only" the number
> of
> > >>> mac-addresses supported and the sw modularity.
> > >>>
> > >>> Can anybody help in digging more the "technical" difference ?
> > >>
> > >> I'm going through much the same at the moment, and settling on 6807,
> largely
> > >> from a price perspective.
> > >>
> > >> ASR9k is (today) a more capable box for routing - particularly if you
> want
> > >> higher bandwidths. ASR9k has 100G ports today. 6807 only has 40G.
> ASR9k can
> > >> be more flexible on EoMPLS (VPLS) than 6807.
> > >>
> > >> 6807 has a lot of potential (880G per slot), but it's not supported
> by either
> > >> Supervisors or Linecards that are available today (current limit is
> 80G/slot).
> > >>
> > >> Simon
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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/
>



-- 
*Med Vänliga Hälsningar / Best Regards*
*Mattias Gyllenvarg*