[c-nsp] ASR9001 Vs ASR1006

[Satish Patel]

But most importantly, if you require high-touch services such as NAT,
Firewalling, IPSec, e.t.c., then the ASR1000 is a better fit than the
ASR9001.

We have very basic BGP configuration (mostly default route). but we
are going to use more ACL and PBR policies.

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
>
>
> On 14/May/16 18:59, Satish Patel wrote:
>
>> We have only ethernet termination from ISP multiple 10G fibers and all
>> ethernet technologies running  (no TDM, Frame Relay etc). We are
>> running BGP, QoS, ACL and Netflow.
>>
>> Which router i should pick between these two, my sales person said use
>> ASR9001 which is more popular in market and very less people using
>> ASR1006.
>
> To be honest, both platforms can be Ethernet-centric (more favour toward
> the ASR9001, though).
>
> The main difference is that the ASR9001 gets a lot of forwarding
> performance in a 2U platform that you might be need an ASR1006-X,
> ASR1009-X or ASR1013 for.
>
> But most importantly, if you require high-touch services such as NAT,
> Firewalling, IPSec, e.t.c., then the ASR1000 is a better fit than the
> ASR9001.
>
> Mark.