[j-nsp] Miercom Competitive Performance Testing Results: Cisco ASR9000 vs Juniper MX960
dwinkworth at att.net
Sun Sep 27 12:25:43 EDT 2009
1) We are testing 9.3r4 on MX right now to get the hell off 9.2r2. Can't wait to be done with that lemon release..
2) We put no stock in vendor testing from anyone, including Juniper. When you start poking and prodding for details, you start hearing.. "Well this is the thing..." and "About that, yeah, basically that isn't exactly..." and then you realize in every case that these tests are total bullsh*t. Indeed, they rig the tests to make their products appear more favorable.
3) We are going to test back-to-back ASRs as a NAT solution. It will be the first time we test these boxes for a specific application. I believe these boxes will be serious competitors once they mature. Having said that, we have been burned by crappy coding so many times (from all vendors) that when they told us they are loading 100s of features a month into these boxes... we just couldn't believe it. There is no way we are putting any stock in that until its baked a little while. Not to mention they had trouble getting the ASR to boot and function very early on in our lab. It just didn't leave us with a good impression. But I'll say it again... I'm certain these boxes will be serious business in the next 12-24 months.
Lets face it, services in M-series boxes are a little kludgy... Even if you are OK with many of the configuration restrictions (source NAT stinks, one dynamic IP IPsec profile per public IP, no GDOI yet or any multipoint encryption solution), then you are limited by the throughput of the services PIC.. and those are awfully expensive these days compared to the SRX or a low-end ASR which are more fexible and have better throughput for the price (for services...).
From: Stefan Fouant <sfouant at gmail.com>
To: mtinka at globaltransit.net
Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 9:58:08 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Miercom Competitive Performance Testing Results: Cisco ASR9000 vs Juniper MX960
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Stefan Fouant <sfouant at gmail.com> wrote:
> You'd think that eventually Cisco would realize the gig was up, and at
> least get some other hired guns to do their testing in the future so they
> could keep the charade going for a few more years.
One other thing I'd like to point out... in talking to my Cisco reps, it
appears the ASR9000 isn't even something you can order at this point, and
won't be generally available for quite some time (I've heard general
availability won't be for at least 12 months at the least). I find it odd
they'd compare something that isn't available to something that's been tried
and proven in networks for years...
Has anyone on-list managed to get your hands on an ASR9000?
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
More information about the juniper-nsp