[j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

[Mark Tinka]

On 2/Dec/15 11:44, James Bensley wrote:

> With the exception of LAGs (IMO) as port-channels on the ASR1000
> series does not support QoS very well at all on them;
>
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/qos_mqc/configuration/xe-3s/qos-mqc-xe-3s-book/qos-eth-int.html#GUID-95630B2A-986E-4063-848B-BC0AB7456C44

Anything IOS and IOS XE is utterly and completely rubbish when it comes
to policing and general QoS on LAG's. Again, this is where the MX (Trio
+ Junos) outshines them all.

We've been doing some work with Cisco in trying to get better QoS and
policing on LAG's on IOS and IOS XE systems, but this won't happen soon.
It's one of the biggest flaws in IOS and IOS XE today, if you ask me.

For now, we try to avoid having to run LAG's on links that require
complex QoS and policing features on IOS and IOS XE boxes. Other than
that, peachy...

Mark.