[j-nsp] Router for full routes

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Fri Jun 29 15:35:28 EDT 2018

On 29/Jun/18 17:10, Rob Foehl wrote:

> Thanks for the detailed reply, Mark.
> By "ancient", I mean boxes still running RE-S-1300s, original SCBs,
> and either DPCs or older MPC2s -- basically, everything EOL except the
> chassis, and running a mix of 1G and 10G interfaces.  The limited slot
> count isn't much of an issue, especially with the possibility of
> moving to at least MPC3Es with 10x10G MICs.
> The REs are the biggest issue, stuck on old code and not nearly enough
> memory.  1G interfaces are also a problem, but switches are cheap...
> I do like the idea of the MX204 as an edge box, currently have some
> MX80s in that role that wouldn't be missed.

Fair point, bringing an MX240/480/960 chassis from 2009 up-to-scratch in
2018 could be costlier than going for an MX204. My suggestion would be
that if you want to retain the benefits of a chassis, dump the MX240 and
move to an MX480, and put in the new line cards and RE.

Otherwise, if you have a limited budget and need more bang for you $$
right away, the MX204 will be a better option. But keep in my mind that
this may or may not be good enough for your long term plans, depending
on your use-case.


More information about the juniper-nsp mailing list