[j-nsp] What do you think about the MX line?

[OBrien, Will]

I'm very happy with it, but I've only got MX960s.
It's a fantastic platform for user aggregation. I use it to police per individual IP across a couple of /16s. Soon I'll be rolling out NAT services for a /16 of private space for wireless users.

I'd like to get some of the new smaller boxes, but I'm still waiting for that ideal setup.

My only complaint has been due to the fact that I only have 10gb blades. I've had to burn a port for tunnel services on the box. (On the 40 port gig blades, a 41st interface is there just for tunnel services.)
I'm hoping that the port price goes down to make it  good option for campus building aggregation, but for now it's stuck on my edge, mostly due to port cost (and other factors that have no bearing here)

As far as reliability, it's been a great box. I've lost one RE, which caused a minor blip (I don't have the REs set up for HA routing at the moment) The recovery was so fast, my coworkers just assumed that I was messing around!
In general, the MX platform is a pleasure to work with. I keep waiting for some MX specific advanced training to come out, but otherwise I love those things.

Oh, and even a 960 will mount in a two post rack. :)


On Jun 25, 2011, at 8:25 AM, Chris wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I've been doing some research into using the MX line of Juniper
> routers and was interested in hearing people's experiences (the good,
> bad, and ugly). What do you like about them? What do you dislike?
> Where are you putting them in your network? Where are you not putting
> them? Why? What other platforms would you consider and why? I hope to
> hear some candid responses, but feel free to respond privately if you
> need to.
> 
> Thanks!
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp