[j-nsp] 10G BGP EX vs MX series implementation?
Correa Adolfo
acorrea at mcmtelecom.com.mx
Mon Jun 6 14:27:19 EDT 2011
Thanks,
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Hanks [mailto:dhanks at juniper.net]
Sent: lunes, 06 de junio de 2011 12:22 p.m.
To: Correa Adolfo; Puck Nether (juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net)
Subject: RE: 10G BGP EX vs MX series implementation?
Correa,
The EX4500 isn't going to support 3x full BGP tables.
You can take a look the MX240 if you want a single box with redundant REs, or use (2) MX80s fully meshed.
Thank you,
....................................
Doug Hanks
Systems Engineer
JNCIP-M/T #1441
-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Correa Adolfo
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 9:21 AM
To: Puck Nether (juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net)
Subject: [j-nsp] 10G BGP EX vs MX series implementation?
Hi, I want to purchase a 10G device that supports
- 4x 10G port
- 3x full BGP table (ISP) plus about 5 BGP customers
- 10x 1G port
I was attracted to buy an MX-80 with it's 4x 10G ports unblocked.
The downside of the MX80 is that it cannot be processor redundant (only from 240 and up) .
Can a EX4500 handle the BGP part? It is cheaper and I think it can be redundant.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
More information about the juniper-nsp
mailing list