<div>Alex, either the SuperX or SX800 can be equipped with the Layer 3 routing package, the real difference is whether or not you need redundancy in the switch fabric/management module. The SuperX supports a single mgmt module, the SX800 and 1600 can be configured with dual/redundant management blades. It should be fine for what you are describing, but I will let the list respond in that regard.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Mike<br><br></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jan 15, 2008 1:08 PM, Alexander Koch <<a href="mailto:efraim@clues.de">efraim@clues.de</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Folks,<br><br>some ppl will surely think I am crazy to continue asking. Is anyone using<br>a SuperX or SX800 for real routing, BGP and some 10G or so of traffic?
<br><br>I have a few folks that say the box was giving issues and all, but is<br>anyone doing this right now, and is it actually working? Also for those<br>it is not / was not working out, can you please speak up and tell me?
<br><br>I am of the understanding also the SX800 is what I want if I want to have<br>some more traffic and a little BGP, right?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Alexander<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>foundry-nsp mailing list
<br><a href="mailto:foundry-nsp@puck.nether.net">foundry-nsp@puck.nether.net</a><br><a href="http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp" target="_blank">http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>