[j-nsp] Junos Fusion Provider Edge

Saku Ytti saku at ytti.fi
Mon Jun 6 10:11:14 EDT 2016

Apologies for hijacking.

Why are people buying into satellite concept? It will obviously have
poorer MTBF than just sticking L2 switch to a router, due to more
complex control-plane, which necessarily will mean more software

So what are the benefits gained? Easier provisioning? Getting rid of
some issues like MAC learning, which you should be able to disable in
switch too.

On related note, is no one making reasonable 1GE aggregation device,
with full DFZ? If MX104 and ASR9001 are best we have, then situation
seems dire. I don't need NPU/run-to-completion level intelligence,
some pipeline basic low-touch box would be sufficient, but isn't
anyone making those?

On 6 June 2016 at 17:05, Jackson, William <william.jackson at gibtele.com> wrote:
> Hi all
> Any one used Junos Fusion Provider Edge?
> I was wondering if the aggregation device can be an MX virtual Chassis rather than a single standalone MX?
> And if using qfx units as satellites, do you need any fancy licenses on them if the smarts are on the MX?
> Many thanks
> William Jackson
> NGN Engineering
> Gibtelecom
> Tel: +350 58007229
> Fax: +350 20043333
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


More information about the juniper-nsp mailing list