[j-nsp] MX240

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:38:41PM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Richard's suggestion to consider the MX80 is a good idea, 
> especially if you're looking at having two for redundancy. 
> My main concern is JUNOS 10.x, especially since you're 
> somewhat new to Juniper. But if you can hang in there, the 
> code will improve with time. The MX80 is definitely great 
> for peering... it's a role we're considering for it here, 
> since it's too pricey to stick in the metro :-).

Eh... Given his incredibly simple sounding config, personally I'd just
just get the Trio/MX80 cards and call it a better long term investment. 
Depending on your exact config they're somewhere between a little and a
lot cheaper than the old DPCs, and they integrate a lot of the things
that you previously needed services DPCs for too. Now if only they'd fix
the damn BGP bugs, we're seeing 4-5 minute stalls from flapping a single
IBGP session in 10.1 tests.

-- 
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)