[j-nsp] juniper router reccomendations

[james jones]

+1 MX104

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Adam Vitkovsky <Adam.Vitkovsky at gamma.co.uk>
wrote:

> > Mike [mailto:mike+jnsp at willitsonline.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 5:09 PM
> > To: Adam Vitkovsky; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] juniper router reccomendations
> >
> > On 07/28/2016 12:50 AM, Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
> > >
> > > And on how effective is the NPU's lookup process, that is how
> > > effective is the actual lookup algorithm with CPU cycles and memory
> > > accesses, some NPUs can even offload complex lookup tasks to a
> > > specialized chip.
> > >
> >
> > I appreciate your presence on other forums, but I'm pretty sure nobody
> here
> > needs a basic explanation of how modern router platforms work. If you
> > missed it, the question was specifically about juniper and bang for the
> buck
> > and routing bgp on 10g and filtering.
> >
> > Some folks helpfully suggested using strategies to to decrease the
> required
> > size of the FIB, potentially meaning a lower box could do that job. That
> has
> > some merit, as the OP was right in that for this job I don't really care
> about
> > timbuktu more as whats 'close' to my two ip transit providers. I know
> nothing
> > of juniper and I'm just wondering if
> > MX80 is enough box for this or if I need to go higher up in the food
> chain. The
> > one iptransit provider at my 'A' location appears to originate about 20
> > networks from various netblocks and this would be easy to statically
> enter
> > into config while accepting defaults from both, achieving the same net
> result.
> >
> Ok let me dial back a notch then.
> You mentioned you need DoS filtering.
> Good DoS filters can get really complex and long (hence IDS/IPS systems
> exist).
> Complex filters cripple router's performance.
> Bottom line, depending on the complexity of DoS filters and pps rate,
> going with the cheapest box might not cut it.
> Hope you got my drift this time around.
>
> But to answer your question filtering 10G in and routing 1G out, there's a
> pretty good chance you'll be fine on MX80/MX104.
> Though as others have pointed out, how swift or scalable is the
> control-plane is another thing to consider.
>
> PS:
> Just out of interest, would you folks know if MX80 and MX104 have a Gen2
> Trio? (80Gbps per single PFE seems like Gen2, unless they are doing
> something "smart" with multiple LUs on one XM).
>
>
> 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.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered
> safely by Mimecast.
>  For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>