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

[Mark Tinka]

On Monday, June 27, 2011 06:56:48 AM Keegan Holley wrote:

> I think the general attitude is positive towards them. 
> They are a good compliment to the M/T series and
> generally solid flexible boxes.  You should probably
> include how you plan to use them in your question.  For
> example a few list members complain about multicast/IGMP
> bugs and other issues with the new trio based cards and
> some of the new code.  If you don't run alot of
> multicast these wouldn't really apply to you.

For us, we use them heavily in the edge, and that hasn't 
been the smoothest of rides.

My guess is if you need them for peering or in the core, you 
might have less issues, but not necessarily (we already know 
of core applications where the MX could be troublesome - but 
the edge role takes the cake, by far).

There are also some limitations, so far, if we use them as 
BRAS's, but these are mostly bugs are feature unavailability 
at this time. The problem is that without the feature being 
present today, it's hard to know how the box will scale, 
which could be a big problem unto itself.

All in all, it depends on the complexity/sophistication of 
your deployment, the role you're placing the MX in, and what 
features you're going to need. For some folk, it's the 
perfect box. For others, it's less so.

Mark.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20110627/72f84808/attachment.pgp>