[c-nsp] ASR920 vs ASR1001-x

Gert Doering gert at greenie.muc.de
Fri Apr 29 06:39:25 EDT 2016


On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:35:39PM +0200, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
> Interesting - one of our local Cisco distributors, in a meeting with us
> and with Cisco people present, repeatedly called ASR920 a Layer 3 switch.
> With no protest from the Cisco representatives.

Given that it can only do routing if you feed it a L3 license, it definitely
looks switchy to me :-)

OTOH, the boundaries are truly floating today - what is a 6500/sup720,
what is an ASR9000?  I'd call the first one a switch, and the second one
a router, even if the ASR9000 can do more ethernet switching tricks than
the 6500...

The traditional way to decide is "price".  And that definitely makes the
ASR920 a switch, and the ASR9000 a router :-)

USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
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/20160429/f4bc8a28/attachment.sig>

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list