[j-nsp] EX unsupported filter policer and actions on loopback lo0

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 05:52:21PM -0500, Stefan Fouant wrote:
> 
> The thing is it completely goes against their main marketing thrust 
> right now, which is the whole "One Junos" mantra.  They keep talking 
> about how Junos is Junos, across the board, no matter which platform 
> and it's their main selling point when compared to Cisco with its many 
> flavors of IOS, IOS-XR, NX-OS, CatOS, etc...
> 
> I wonder if that study by Lake Partners where customers running Junos 
> averaged a 25% reduction in OpEx took this into consideration.  
> Performing control plane filtering by deploying an ingress filter on 
> all your interfaces on an EX platform, vs. doing it on loopbacks on 
> all the other platforms means that operators are spending twice as 
> much time to accomplish the same result...

To a certain extent, it still is one JUNOS. When they add a new BGP 
feature you're going to get that feature on every box, from your T1600 
routing hundreds of gigabits, all the way down to your J-series box 
terminating a T1. This is still pretty darn powerful, and covers a HUGE 
range of functionality that is not hardware specific. At the end of the 
day it really doesn't matter that there is one giant tarball which just 
happens to contain a PFE image for the original M40, as well as a T1600.

IMHO the problem with the EX platform was that in the rush to create a 
cheaper, more "enterprise-grade" product, they didn't fully leverage the 
many years of experience that Juniper already has making good routers. 
This lead to a lot of serious design flaws which you would NEVER see on 
another Juniper box, but that honestly are the same kinds of screwups 
you might see on any other "enterprise-grade" box. It's not a completely 
worthless box, infact in many ways it is quite nice, but you need to put 
aside any and all assumptions you have about what should and should not 
work on a Juniper router first. If you go into it comparing it against a 
6509 instead of an MX, you'll come away with a completely different take 
on the product.

-- 
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)