[j-nsp] Going Juniper

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/Apr/18 05:07, Chris via juniper-nsp wrote:

>  
> I can't speak for the MX240, but we have some deployments of the
> MX104, MX80 and the vMX.
>
> For the MX104 (and the MX80) the main limitation they have is that the
> CPU on the routing engine is terribly slow. This can be a problem for
> you if you are taking multiple full tables with BGP. Even without
> taking full tables, the RE CPU on the MX104's I have is basically
> always at 100%. Commits are pretty slow as well. This shouldn't be
> such an issue with the MX240 as it has a wider range of routing
> engines available with much better specs.

We've discontinued all our MX80's - moved those to MX480's.

We are in the process of ditching all our MX104's. Most likely move
those to MX480's as well.

We got a lot of life out of our MX80's... ran them since 2012. Shame
though about the MX104's, only had those in since 2016.

I can't fault the MX80; it did what it was designed to do. But the MX104
was, basically, a very poor decision from Juniper. I hope it's haunting
at least one person there never to repeat such in the future. You can't
play games with your customers like that...

Mark.