[c-nsp] Cisco ASR vs Juniper

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Wed May 24 18:00:47 EDT 2017

On 5/24/17 4:35 PM, Aaron Gould wrote:

> About the MX104 and ACX5000....
> I have ~7,000 dsl customers being nat'd behind /24 of address space on a
> pair of MX104's... they run nicely on two mpls l3vpn's... nat inside vrf
> (ri) and nat outside vrf (ri)

The RE sucks. It's too slow.

We are now running them out in some sites and replacing them with
MX480's. Pity, since the MX104 data plane is solid.

> I have deployed (~30) ACX5048's as mpls p's and pe's and they are running
> well.  I have hit a bug with VPLS that requires a vpls routing-instance
> bounce to revive, but JTAC just told me the PR is hitting D20 software and
> fixed in D25.... still need to test that.  But all in all, I like the
> ACX5048's.

For our use-case, the Broadcom in those routers presents some
limitations Juniper are never going to fix.

That said, the Broadcom chipset does make them cheaper, but you also pay
for that in other ways.


More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list