[j-nsp] EX4600 Vs QFX 5100 VS ACX 5048

[Saku Ytti]

On 3 May 2016 at 05:43, Harald F. Karlsen <elfkin at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would say it depends on the market they aim for. If they could price a
> small form-factor Trio-based device to compete with the smaller ASRs (or
> even ME switches) they could ramp up production and hence decrease
> production cost. I really think a lot of service providers want MPLS closer
> to the edge and I think it's a big market for anyone who makes a

I agree, MPLS to the edge is great idea. What do the boxes need to
cost? I know someone who paid 3500EUR per MX80 (years years ago, when
MX104 nor MX5/10/40 didn't exist) and deployed many hundred if not 1k
of them as seamless MPLS access/edge device.

MX80, MX104 are competitive against ASR9001 purely from BOM POV, as
they are single chip fabricless devices. But still, similar box with
pipeline/low touch asic style solution would be even cheaper, it is
just how it is.

I don't think JNPR will ever compete with Trio platform against ASR or
ME, ACX is for that segment, but perhaps ACX is not there for all
use-cases.

> TLDR; I want to replace my metro switches with proper MPLS routers and only
> spend marginally more on it. I personally think there's a big market for
> whoever makes such a device.

What are you missing in ASR920 or ACX2k? But I do think that
inevitably what happened to L3 in switches will happen to MPLS, soon
you just cannot buy non-consumer switch which does not do MPLS.

> usually the biggest concern. A lot of SPs operate in both domains so it's
> all about finding the best compromise (or maybe two different SKUs?).

Interesting point. I wonder what would be the industrial design cost
for height and depth optimised versions when designed at the same
time. If 100% is current cost of industrial design, would it be 200%,
surely not? 150%? less?
-- 
  ++ytti