[c-nsp] Peering Router/Switch

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 12:06:49PM +0100, James Bensley wrote:
> On 5 October 2015 at 10:24, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
> > And on the Juniper side, I'd go for the MX104.
> 
> Or an MX80, that would be cheaper. I've done this in the past, it
> works very well.

I wouldn't actually consider the PPC based REs particularily well-suited
for a *peering* router (read: "lots of BGP activity" = "a fast CPU and/or
a good multi-process BGP implementation is what you want") - this RE is 
almost as slow as a sup720, and I wouldn't use one of those either.

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 291 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20151005/6110b37c/attachment.sig>