[c-nsp] Cisco N540-ACC-SYS ipv4 routes

[Mark Tinka]

On 16/Jul/20 20:48, Phil Bedard wrote:
> To be fair there are many many ASR9K systems out there today which have been in networks for many year.  There is a new generation of cards for those coming out which do not require a chassis swap people will be using for many years to come.

If we wanted to use a purely Ethernet-focused box for our core when we
deployed back in 2014, I'd have gone with the MX960.

The CRS made a lot of sense because we had a need for plenty of
non-Ethernet links, and both the MX and ASR9000 were too expensive on a
per-slot basis.


>    CRS-X I would agree doesn't have the longevity of some of the other platforms.  In the end Cisco builds hardware people ask for, and unfortunately has to retire hardware people no longer want to purchase. 

The CRS-X is neither EoS nor EoL. It can do 400Gbps/slot (even though I
am sure it can do more, but then where do you put the NCS 6000), and has
plenty of room for growth.

My problem with Cisco is their solution to a lot of their products is a
complete swap-out. Making us have to replace a ton of CRS-X's with
ASR9000's so I can get "cheap" 100Gbps ports when our current platform
is nowhere near dying is just silly and opportunistic.

>  
>
> The 8000 series is much less power and higher throughput than a current generation PTX.  An 8202 is around 750W.   As mentioned you can use breakouts but to breakout 4x100G from 400G is going to require changing optics on the other side, 2x100G does not.  The 8000 series and its silicon are going to be around for a long time.  

The lack of 10Gbps support on the 8200's notwithstanding, I just don't
trust Cisco anymore. Boxes come and go with them before they'd have time
to bake in, who knows what they'll come up with next.

Mark.