[j-nsp] MX104 Limitations

[Mark Tinka]

On 24/Jun/15 15:58, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
> Obviously this list came from someone with a biased viewpoint of
> nothing but problems with Juniper -- A Competitor. Consider that there
> are also positives. For example, In Software, most people here would
> rank JunOS > Cisco IOS > Brocade > Arista > Force10 >From question 12,
> it seems that you are considering Alcatel Lucent 7750 as your
> alternative -- Unfortunately you won't find nearly as many people with
> ALU experience, so it will be a bit harder to get fair commentary
> comparing the two. It might also be harder to find engineers to manage
> them.
And to be fair, you are not going to find competitive analysis between
vendors that is unbiased.

I know of some competitive analysts who are fair about their
competitor's implementations, to the extent that they will appreciate
how the competition solved a particular problem, and signal their
Product teams to do the same or better.

Otherwise, asking one vendor to speak to another vendor's solution is
not a useful way to evaluate your options, especially if you take their
word seriously.

Successful vendors have found that developing various use-cases - within
reason - in the market is what gets you share. My ALU-foo is quite
limited, but speaking for Cisco and Juniper, each of these vendors has a
flavor for pretty much everyone:

    - Line cards with high-end QoS.
    - Line cards with low-end QoS.
    - Line cards with fixed ports.
    - Line cards with combo ports.
    - Line cards that are modular.
    - Line cards that draw low power.
    - Line cards that draw high power.
    - Line cards that are over-subscribed.
    - Line cards that run at line rate.
    - Line cards with old optics (GBIC< X2, XFP, CFP).
    - Line cards with new optics (SFP, SFP+, CPF2).
    - Line cards with low memory.
    - Line cards with high memory.
    - Line cards that are unlimited re: features.
    - Line cards that are license-based.
    - e.t.c. - you get the picture.

It becomes a case of satisfying your particular use-case.

For example, a lack of H-QoS on the MX80 or MX104 is not a show-stopper
for us if we are using it as a peering/border router. As an edge router
where customers may require complex QoS architectures, you get what you
pay for. And I don't think the vendors should be castigated for that -
you can't blame Mercedes for not delivering fast laps around a grand
prix track when driving one of their 18-wheeler trucks... use-case.

So just focus on what your goals are. Evaluate those requirements with
Juniper and other competitors, and let them quote you the right solution.

Competitive analysis is counter-productive unless you are very intimate
with the workings of all the vendor equipment you're evaluating, enough
to challenge a lot of the bias you will hear. Best to get all the data
and then make your own choice.

Mark.