[j-nsp] Why should I *not* buy an MX?

[Keegan.Holley at sungard.com]

> > > bill fumerola wrote:
> > > > force10's cost advantage is chipped away at by the OP's IPv6 
> requirement.
> > > 
> > > Yes, IPv6 and MPLS are not currently supported (and they might be or
> > > not, in the future) by Force-10. Pricewise that would lead to 
choosing
> > > Cisco Cat6K with or without DFCs depending on throughput 
requirements.
> > 
> > I believe that this is half in error. IPv6 is supported, if not too
> > well, in recent software, but MPLS support will require a new ASIC 
spin
> > and I can't be sure when/if that will happen. IPv6 support was 
designed
> > into all of the F10 ASICs produced in the past three or four years, 
but
> > the software support was slow in arriving.
> 
> i'm half in agreement with half in error.
> 
> last time i asked, on the F10 platforms that mattered there were two
> line cards you could buy and if you wanted IPv6 (or a realistically 
sized
> IPv4 table distributed to the line card), you needed the more expensive
> of the two.
> 
> so, i only said it impacted the "cost advantage". any advantage in price
> over the 6500/7600 platform was reduced when pricing out w/ the more
> expensive line cards. that was for new - discount%. start looking in the
> used market availability of the cat6k platform (chassis, sups, line
> cards) v. the force10 E-series.
> 
> > There is a lot I like about the F10 hardware, but the routing software
> > is still immature compared to other vendors and the lack of MPLS
> > capability makes them a non-starter when we look at hardware.
> 
> MPLS wasn't a requirement for the company/at the time i inquired, but
> the fact that it couldn't be added w/o a forklift upgrade certainly left
> a bad taste in my mouth. f10 would do well to realize they're being
> lapped by the modern offerings of their competitors.
> 
> -- bill
> _______________________________________________

Stick to the topic... I think we are supposed to be bashing the MX series, 
not it's competitors.