[j-nsp] EX4200 vs. C4948

[Derick Winkworth]

Don't forget dual power supply in the box.  Thats nice.

10.0r3 is coming and we will be moving all of our EXs to it when it arrives.


As far as egress policing, it isn't there today.  However, you could configure a port-level or queue-level shaping-rate.  You could then change the default transmit-rate (or buffer-size) parameter for the best effort queue to 0 percent.  This would effectively accomplish the same thing as policing, I think. 

Unless you are marking traffic egress based on egress utilization, then I don't think there is a way to accomplish that.

 



________________________________
From: Pavel Gulchouck <gul at gul.kiev.ua>
To: Bill Blackford <BBlackford at nwresd.k12.or.us>
Cc: "juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net" <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Tue, February 23, 2010 1:38:42 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EX4200 vs. C4948

>From my point, EX4200 now has almost all features of cat3750G/cat3750E
importance for NSP: ingress policing, stp (incl. pvstp and rapid-stp), 
lacp, qinq, bpdu tunneling (in 10.x); L3 features: ospf, vrf, limited bgp
(with license)...

But in addition to this EX4200 has:
- working firewall counters;
- junoscripts (incl. event scripts);
- vlan translation (in 10.x, not tested by me);
- pseudowires (not tested by me);
- ipv6 (not sure, not tested by me).

And as for me JunOS is better then IOS (commit, rollback, commit 
confirmed etc.).

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 08:37:15AM -0800, Bill Blackford writes:
> There is an interesting thread on the C list right now discussing the benefits of a l3 switch platform (OP started asking about 3550).

> I am budgeting to replace some 3560G and 3750G customer aggregation devices (OSPF, BGP) with devices that will scale better, have redundant power, can do service policies both input and output and yes it would be nice if it can handle V6 in hardware (last point not an issue yet as V4 is all I support at this time). I am not budgeted for nor do I have environment that requires MX series or a cat6.5/7.6k in this role. It's gonna have to be fixed switches.

> Does the EX4200 support firewall policer that can be applied both input and output? (equiv to "C" service policy). My tests on a EX3200 9.5R2.7 seem to indicate that I cannot use a policer on egress. I have no 4200's to test this with.

> It would be nice to see a feature comparison. Not wanting to start a holy war over vendor preference, but has a discussion comparing these two products occurred on this list? 

-- 
Pavel
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp