[j-nsp] RES: Cisco ME3600 migration to something with more 10 gig ports

[Alexandre Guimaraes]

Taking a hide with Aaron,

	Reading carefully this thread, looking at ACX5000 e QFX5100, I would like to 'hear' the QFX51000 considerations.

	Today, use them at distribution layer, delivering more than 6 switches as a virtual chassis configuration, never had a big issue regarding the software or cpu/memory issues.

	When version 14.1 was released, I just start to tests those QFX5100 due to 40Gb ports, for l2circuits/p2p circuits with all MPLS services, regarding some limitation(vpls), and never had major issues regarding the software issues and so on, even using ISSU for upgrade the QFX5100.

	Richard mentioned a bad experience with QFX5100.

Richard,
	Coud you please share what you had experienced?






Alexandre

-----Mensagem original-----
De: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] Em nome de Aaron
Enviada em: segunda-feira, 26 de outubro de 2015 17:49
Para: 'Raphael Mazelier'; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Assunto: Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ME3600 migration to something with more 10 gig ports

Thanks again for all your insights and feedback.  I've tried to bring your comments all together here below...

I'm revisiting this thread please since I am still looking to replace my Cisco Me3600's in my distribution layer of my network.  They only have (2)
10 gig ports and I need more 10 gig.  I want all mpls l2vpn/l3vpn capabilities that I at least have on my current ME3600's.

I would like to add that (6) ports 10 gig may not be enough for us to scale to the future.  We would like more than 6.  If I LAG (2) 10's to my OLT/FTTH Chassis and go east and west with 20 gig each direction, then I've used up all (6) 10 gig's.  I think this rules out the ASR920's.  

--------------------------------------------------------------
About the Juniper ACX5000...

Mark mentioned - "Juniper's ACX5000 units are multi-rate systems. Only problem is there are Broadcom chipsets in there. Okay for most applications, but you may hit fundamental issues that software can't rectify. That is why we dropped our consideration for them."...... " The ACX5000 was a reasonable attempt, but that Broadcom chipset is a liability. As always, Juniper continue to drop the ball on this...."

James mentioned - " Yep, I mean it's a QFX 5100.  Cisco ASR 9xx are certainly more better suited IMO for edge applications."
--------------------------------------------------------------
About the Juniper EX4550...

Mark mentioned - " The EX4550 falls very short of that re: full IP/MPLS capabilities."
Raphael mentioned - "If l3vpn is your case you can consider ex4550 (with caution). I use them as PE with some kind of success. But... there is some limitations you should be aware of :  
- the cpu is slow, even the snmp process can kill the control plane if there is too much polling
- mpls : l2circuit is working, but not l2vpn, nor vpls. l3vpn is working but the number of routing instance is limited (around 40 if I remember correctly. And the big one : no local leaking between routing instance. Very annoying.
- snmp counter on sub interface (but there are workaround)
--------------------------------------------------------------
About the Juniper QFX5100...

Richard mentioned - " My experience with that platform and 14.1 has been very unpleasant.  13.2 does not support MPLS PE."
--------------------------------------------------------------
About the Cisco ASR903...

I'm interested in this.  What do y'all think about this?  It seems that this is a scalable box with its dual power, dual cpu, 6 slot with various Ethernet card options.  I wonder what a starter box would cost (chassis, one cpu, one power supply, one (8) port 10 gig module) ?



Any other comparable products out there y'all know of?

Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Raphael Mazelier
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 12:45 PM
To: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Cisco ME3600 migration to something with more 10 gig ports



Le 14/07/15 15:45, Phil Mayers a écrit :

>
> L3VPN was our use-case; it may or may not do L2VPN, we don't have much 
> use for it locally.
>

If l3vpn is your case you can consider ex4550 (with caution).
I use them as PE with some kind of succes. But.. there is some limitations you should be aware of :

- the cpu is slow, even the snmp process can kill the control plane if there is too much polling
- mpls : l2circuit is working, but not l2vpn, nor vpls. l3vpn is working but the number of routing instance is limited (arround 40 if I remember correctly. And the big one : no local leaking between routing instance. 
Very annoying.
- snmp counter on sub interface (but there are workarround)

Regards,

--
Raphael Mazelier
_______________________________________________
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