[j-nsp] juniper qfx5100 vs ex9200

[Tim Jackson]

QFX5100 has L2VPN (LDP based) now, and will get EVPN support..
On Dec 24, 2014 7:07 AM, "Chuck Anderson" <cra at wpi.edu> wrote:

> EX9200 has more potential to support more MPLS features as a PE, like
> EVPN.  QFX5100 is a nice box, but won't do much MPLS (L3VPN, but no
> L2VPN, VPLS or EVPN).  See the Feature Explorer:
>
> http://pathfinder.juniper.net/feature-explorer/search-features.html
>
> Interestingly, EX9200 isn't shown as having L3VPN support.  You need
> to take the Feature Explorer with a grain of salt.  If you look up
> "BGP for L2VPNs and L3VPNs" for example, it only shows PTX support for
> that feature, but of course MX supports that too.
>
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 03:55:30AM +0000, Randy Manning wrote:
> > People,
> >
> > Any advice on a distribution layer switch for campus networks?  juniper
> > qfx5100 vs ex9200?  I am not sure what the requirements need to be a
> > priority.  The core is MX 960 and currently routing.  I am thinking about
> > campus distro¹s becoming PE with TE and allowing the core¹s to label
> > switch only?  Given the current network and possible change, which
> > platform is the best?  Qfx or ex?
> >
> > Data centers are working well with q-fabric, but I understand that has
> > been abandoned by juniperŠ. Which is sadŠ I liked the eVPN BGP NLRI
> design.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -----
> > Randy
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp