[j-nsp] MX240

[Keith]

On Tue, 11 May 2010, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

|->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.

Aye, incredibly simple is right. Intersting notes about the MX80, it might
be a better option long term.

Thanks.