[j-nsp] Juniper equivalents for migration from Cisco

[Delian Delchev]

You can not compare directly the products this way. The vendors are not
copying always from each other the products.
The solution is always a matter of design.

Let me tell you what I mean.

Cisco is not having equivalent to Extreme x650 (1RU 24 ports
10/100/1Gbps/10Gbps, wirespeed, 512Gbps stacking), what are they suggesting
instead? Nexus is more expensive, can not stack, limited to 256 vlans. 45xx
does not have wirespeed 10Gbps, and the price per port is several times
higher? 65xx/76xx are extremely more expensive, also not wirespeed, the
power usage is extreme, the 10Gbit/s density - the lowest on the market
(which is normal for a product that is on the market for 12+ years). So what
you do if you want to go for Cisco (if the decision is vendor centric -
something that I really don't like)? You don't care how the product looks,
you care what you want to succeed with it, and then you choose from the
product list, based on performance, total price, complexity, functionality.

So - comparing Cisco to Juniper directly is absolutely not correct. EX4200
is equivalent more to Cisco 3750 series, but is cheaper (on list price),
having better stacking (3+ times faster), much better L3 capabilities, much
better TCAM for both L2 and L3 processing (both having more lines and having
wider key), more ram, more cpu, more flash, more hw features, which is
normal for device that is designed 3 years ago, compared to device that have
been designed almost 10 years ago. The Juniper equivalent to Cisco 45xx
series is EX8200, which is larger and more denser product. But from arch,
design and marketing perspective it is the product positioned in the same
conditions where 45xx would be. You may mistakenly assume that EX8200 is
equivalent to 65xx, and it is, in size. But against 65xx and 76xx the more
correct juniper product should be the MX.

You can not simply replace cisco device with juniper device what so ever. At
the end you want to provide some basic functionality to the network, not
good looking boxes. Juniper is lacking some L2 features behind Cisco in the
switches, but is having much better L3 capabilities. So you can not do
simple replacement, you still have to think what you want to provide as
functionality.

Delian


On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:47, Martin Barry <marty at supine.com> wrote:

> We're a Cisco shop currently and I've been trying to identify the
> equivalent
> Juniper products but am struggling a little.
>
> We use 4900m in the core, 1GbE copper and fibre for up-links, 10GbE for
> inter-switch links. It's mostly a switch but there is some layer 3, BGP
> routing, VRFs. There doesn't appear to be a good match from Juniper. The
> EX4500-40F comes closest but doesn't have the same modular flexibility. We
> just don't need 40 ports per chassis from day one. Should I be looking at
> the MX range instead?
>
> We use 4948-10GE for access/TOR. The corresponding Juniper appears to be
> EX4200-48T with EX-UM-2X4SFP.
>
> If I've missed other options or am barking up the wrong tree any pointers
> gladly appreciated.
>
> cheers
> Marty
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>