[j-nsp] Need suggestions..

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:39:09PM -0500, Brendan Mannella wrote:
> I couldn't even get a quote on the mx80 so I am not sure where they
> need to discount too. I would rather have the 240 as it allows for
> redundant RE's. But it was out of my budget.

The price of an MX240 chassis is quite a bit "off" from where it should
be, IMHO. That is to say, the difference in price between an MX960 and
an MX240 chassis is so small that the total cost per unit of bandwidth
goes to complete and total hell if you aren't buying fully loaded
MX960s. I'm sure there is a reason for the way it is priced, i.e.  it is
related to Juniper's manufacturing costs, but the end result is that
smaller customers who could have benefited from an MX platform have been
priced completely out of the market.

One of the reasons that the MX80 looks like it is going to be so popular
is that it specifically addresses this problem by providing a much
cheaper entry level platform, especially if you are able to get by with
the fixed config version (4x XFP, 48x 10/100/1000 copper) rather than
the MIC version. The list price difference between the above fixed
config MX80 and a MX240 base (with non-redundant and non-upgraded fabric
and RE) and the same interfaces in a full routing config is something
like 3.6x. I expect there will probably be some backwards movement on
the level of discounts Juniper will be willing to give on the new
products, but it is pretty darn hard to change the overall picture when 
there is a 360% difference in price. IMHO wait for the MX80, it looks 
like it is going to be a real winner.

-- 
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)