[j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

[Adam Vitkovsky]

> From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 2:11 PM
> On 1/Dec/15 11:35, Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
> > ASR9010 is much better product than MX960
>
> Before 2015, I'd have said marginally better. But after 2015, I think I prefer
> the MX chassis' to the ASR9000.
>
> Apart from the rather heavy IOS XR and its long upgrade times, reliably
> policing on LAG's is important to me. The Juniper way of implementing this is
> quite elegant, while IOS XR takes a bit of a "take it or leave it" attitude.
>
Well as I said many times LAGs are tricky :)
Therefore QOS on LAGs is tricky as well,
e.g. if you police the VLAN to 120M on a 4x10G LAG each link gets only 40M if more than 40M worth of streams gets hashed on one link you get into trouble.
And it takes quite a fiddling to get Juniper LAGs failover/recover under 50ms.


adam



        Adam Vitkovsky
        IP Engineer

T:      0333 006 5936
E:      Adam.Vitkovsky at gamma.co.uk
W:      www.gamma.co.uk

This is an email from Gamma Telecom Ltd, trading as “Gamma”. The contents of this email are confidential to the ordinary user of the email address to which it was addressed. This email is not intended to create any legal relationship. No one else may place any reliance upon it, or copy or forward all or any of it in any form (unless otherwise notified). If you receive this email in error, please accept our apologies, we would be obliged if you would telephone our postmaster on +44 (0) 808 178 9652 or email postmaster at gamma.co.uk

Gamma Telecom Limited, a company incorporated in England and Wales, with limited liability, with registered number 04340834, and whose registered office is at 5 Fleet Place London EC4M 7RD and whose principal place of business is at Kings House, Kings Road West, Newbury, Berkshire, RG14 5BY.