[c-nsp] Cisco ASR vs Juniper

[James Bensley]

On 10 May 2017 at 22:08, Aaron Gould <aaron1 at gvtc.com> wrote:
> I also like what I've seen recently in the Juniper ACX5048 (48/72 - 10 gig
> ports, or (6) 40 gig ports), which replaced lots of my older Cisco ME3600
> boxes (only two 10 gig ports).

Did you hit any QoS issues with this? The ACX5048 and QFX5100-48S both
say 8 queues per port, on our MEs we have loads of queues per port, is
this just a difference in nomenclature between vendors or really just
8 queues per port?

Case in point, on an ME with say an Ethernet NNI port we will have an
S-Tag per end site and multiple C-Tag per VRF/L3 VPN to that end site.
So the ENNI port will have a simple H-QoS configuration on it. We have
hundreds of S-Tags on an ENNI port and then on average about 3 C-Tags
per S-Tag. Each S-Tag is shaped to the site bandwidth and then a
policy applied to match all the C-Tags which can have to 7 traffic
classes in it. So say 8 queues per S-tag, we have hundreds of queues
per port.

We have been looking at ACX to replace ME’s too but am I missing
something or is the QoS capabilities of the ACX in no way comparable?
I can't find a Juniper product that can replace the MEs at layer 2
(48x 1G/10G ports with >10G uplinks and ME-like QoS).

Cheers,
James.