[j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

[Saku Ytti]

On 30 November 2015 at 15:39, Adam Vitkovsky <Adam.Vitkovsky at gamma.co.uk> wrote:

Hey Adam,

> I think this can be alleviated with BGP provider edge link protection(Cisco BGP PIC Edge)/BGP PIC Edge(Cisco BGP PIC Core).
> However in Junos this is available only for VRFs.

You'll be happy to hear it got into 15.1 for INET \o/

> That's right Trio's LU is just better, it can cope with any combination of features enabled with only small performance hit compared to A9k's NPU.
> However if QX chip is used the whole LU performance advantage is jeopardized (but at least the degradation is deterministic).

My main woe is not feature parity or inherent capability of
Trio/EZ/nPower, it's more that once JNPR ships something, it'll work
on all Trio kit. Cisco is coming up _really_ good troubleshooting
tooling for ASR9k, but they'll arrive at different pace (or maybe not
at all) at different engines, which is completely understandable for
this low-level stuff.

> Also the basic Junos documentation is incomplete and getting some deep level information is next to impossible.

ACK. This is not mentioned often enough, Cisco is doing pretty good
job in documents.

> And what about ASR903 it's very similar product to MX104.

Dunno, I'd say it's more similar to ACX1k, both are running BRCM
Enduro? Looking forward to Waris' webinar.

-- 
  ++ytti