[f-nsp] NetIron MLX-4 vs Juniper MX240

[George B.]

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Niels Bakker
<niels=foundry-nsp at bakker.net> wrote:
> * georgeb at gmail.com (George B.) [Wed 12 May 2010, 01:34 CEST]:
>>
>> And basically the reason is ... I currently show about 320,000 routes
>> from one upstream for v4.  The MLX can handle 512,000 v4 routes in
>> hardware.  That leaves room for about 48,000 ipv6 routes provided the
>> v4 routing table stops growing today but exactly the opposite is going
>> to happen.  As what remaining v4 addresses are broken into smaller
>> pieces, the routing table is going to continue to grow with smaller
>> prefixes.
>
> Ample room for growth if you follow the previous poster's advice which was
> to get an XMR if you want to future-proof your routing.
>
>
>        -- Niels.

Not exactly "ample".  XMR has room for 1,000,000 routes in hardware.
That is room for 170,000 v6 routes on top of the current 320,000 v4
routes.  Those will blow up, too.  I am guessing that the breaking
point will be somewhere around 400,000 v4 routes and 100,000 v6
routes. The price difference between MLX and MXR blades is pretty
steep for no other benefit than more routes.  First vendor to get to
market with a huge CAM resource is going to win, bigtime.  I don't
believe any hardware currently built for the medium size market will
handle full routes dual-stacked once v6 is the norm.

George