[c-nsp] ASR 1k vs 9k as a non-transit BGP router with full tables?

Gert Doering gert at greenie.muc.de
Wed Aug 2 05:58:47 EDT 2017


On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 10:54:13AM +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> ASR 9001 looks like a candidate, 4x 10GE and one
> 20x 1GE line card are definitely sufficient for the
> foreseeable future.

This is what we currently do for "BGP edge", and I totally love the 
box.  Even though software updates are as annoying, mostly because the
flash disk is so sloooowwwww so the fairly complex processes take ages,
and then a bit.

> Are there any licensing pitfalls I need to be aware of with
> refurbished hardware and IOS-XR? Can anybody share
> experience with the "cluster" license and feature for these
> switches?

We did not look at clustering, just the basic IOS XR with MPLS support
(and no VRF license).

L3 VPNs are hellishly expensive, so we don't do that on the ASR9ks.

> According to our supplier they feature 8 GB of memory
> and "a couple of millions of routes (v4 and v6)" - correct?

Yep.  4M routes.

On the Cisco side, I think there's currently nothing better.

On the J side, someone will mention MX240 - which would be a good choice
as well (do not go for MX80 or MX104).


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: 630 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20170802/6eb637d4/attachment.sig>

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list