[j-nsp] Opinions on the QFX 3500 in regards to linerate L3 performance?

[Michel de Nostredame]

Just serious. If you have strict budget problem, why not use DELL Force10
S4810?
For L3 line rate inter vlan routing, it works pretty well. Use it as TOR
seems a good and inexpensive solution, plus it has 4x40GE QSFP+ port can be
used as uplink.
On Mar 16, 2014 9:43 AM, "Paul S." <contact at winterei.se> wrote:

> Budget concerns, mostly. The client can apparently source the 3500s for
> rather affordable pricing, while the 5100 is a bit too new to be available
> via those mediums.
>
> On 3/16/2014 午前 01:41, Giuliano Cardozo Medalha wrote:
>
>> why not using qfx5100 platform ?
>>
>> much better low latency 0,6 us and new hardware from juniper
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>  On 15/03/2014, at 13:02, "Paul S." <contact at winterei.se> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I've got a client who's interested in deploying the 3500 as TORs.
>>>
>>> He'll need to evenly distribute around 20/30g of bandwidth (via
>>> aggregated ethernet links) to multitudes of virtualized systems with
>>> individual vlans all located in singular racks.
>>>
>>> Would the QFX be an okay solution in this scenario? There's an heavy
>>> preference towards Juniper gear due to most of the connected networks being
>>> run on Juniper gear as well.
>>>
>>> And if not, what would the community suggest?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp