[j-nsp] MX vs. M

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 05:31:31PM -0400, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> I've been looking for GSR12406 alternatives and first was led to the  
> M120, but then was led to the MX series.  I need a device to fit into  
> a provider network at the edge, facing transit, peer, backbone and  
> core.  Heavy layer 3, heavy BGP, heavy OSPF, no QoS, no MPLS (yet) -  
> just a big-ass router with lots of wire-speed interfaces at decent  
> bang for the buck.
> 
> The MX seems to be excellent on paper - line rate DPCs, layer 2 and  
> layer 3 capable, JunOS, etc but everything I've read suggests that  
> it's positioned to be an MPLS box, and not a BGP box.  Sure, it runs  
> JunOS so it can do BGP, but...
> 
> I have a hard time believing the MX isn't crippled in some way,  
> because it seems to me that if it weren't, it would stand to  
> cannibalize the M Series market.
> 
> Is the MX as good as it's cracked up to be?  Is the only reason  
> Juniper isn't worried about cannibalization due to the fact that the  
> MX is Ethernet only where the M is mixed media?

It isn't cripled, it's a real Juniper and an excellent platform. Basically 
they took a T-series architecture (actually its a bit closer to M120, 
which is just an evolution on T-series architecture), optimized it for 
Ethernet only with fixed-"pic" DPCs, and cut costs so they could sell it 
competetively against other Ethernet only platforms. It's the exact same 
JUNOS running on a very nice RE (Pentium M 2.0GHz w/4GB DRAM) so its a 
great BGP platform, and it has all the MPLS and other forwarding features 
of a regular T-series type box. I've been running MX's since they first 
shipped, and although there have been a few rough edges due to sw bugs, 
the platform itself is absolutely top notch.

I'd say Juniper has done a good job expanding their customer base, rather 
than cannibalizing against the existing product line. There are certain 
missing features which certain carriers with uncontrolled spending habits 
just can't live without, such as SONET (and the increased PPS capacity 
that comes with it, 26Mpps for OC192 vs 14.8Mpps for 10GE), multi-chassis 
support, and some of the more exotic services cards (i.e. hw netflow, 
unlawful intercept services for AT&T, etc :P). They're definitely 
converting a good amount of 6509/7609/MLX/XMR users into new business, 
since even networks who were Juniper only in the core had a hard time 
justifying a T-series for customer aggregation, metro ethernet, or even 
peering edge. MX fills that role nicely.

If you want an Ethernet only platform (there are some sonet options coming 
soon, but at the usual high prices, think "uplink" role for certain 
carriers) and you don't need exotic services cards, I can't recommend it 
enough over every other platform out there.

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)