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

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Wed Aug 2 07:44:15 EDT 2017

On 2/Aug/17 13:38, Saku Ytti wrote:

> This would surprise me very much. I see MX80/MX104 as ASR9001
> competitor. If JNPR thought they were competing with ASR1k, they are
> extremely confused. ASR1k does NAPT, statefull firewall, encryption
> etc. Juniper really doesn't have ASR1k competitor, but SRX is closer
> than MX.

Just so my comments are clear - the new box will replace the MX80/MX104
from an Ethernet standpoint. However, it won't replace them from a
non-Ethernet standpoint.

So yes, if customers still want non-Ethernet capabilities as well as
low-to-medium speed Ethernet interconnects, the MX80/MX104 will
certainly remain. But like I said, there is no indication from Juniper
that they are going to introduce an Intel-based RE for the MX104.

Juniper have no choice but to keep the MX80 and MX104 as an ASR1000
competitor. None of the M-series boxes are ideal for that. If they don't
revamp this particular line, Cisco will continue to overtake them in
that area.


More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list