[j-nsp] Opinions on fusion provider edge

[Richard McGovern]

To run EVPN on QFX5100 yes you need extra license – PFL (the less expensive option).  NOTE: PFL and AFL always confusing to me, as which is more!!

You could then run the EX4300 connections as an ESI-LAG, versus MC-LAG – has advantages of standards based, can scale horizontally in the core, and AnyCast GW so no VRRP (vs MC-LAG).  Of course with EVPN design you lose the single point of management, BUT with automation, scripting, use of Ansible/etc. this becomes secondary anyway, at least IMHO.

Good news is you do have multiple choices, which might be bad news as well -😊  For me, EVPN is the way to go, along with as much automation as possible.  I think in the end, you’ll find more EVPN based deployments, vs Fusion (and MC-LAG) for new deployments.

I assume you are staying with MX Core because already there, and because no matter what you may need it has it, . . . which comes at a higher price point.

Good luck.

Richard McGovern
Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
978-618-3342


From: Eldon Koyle <ekoyle+puck.nether.net at gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 at 1:30 PM
To: Richard McGovern <rmcgovern at juniper.net>
Cc: Juniper List <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Opinions on fusion provider edge

We are looking at a mix of QFX5100-48S and EX4300-32F (somewhere between 6 and 10 devices total).  It looks like the QFX supports EVPN, but Juniper doesn't seem to have any relatively inexpensive 1Gbe devices with EVPN support.

We are planning on dual-homing most of our buildings (strictly L2, using active-active EVPN or MC-LAG) to a pair of MXes with QSFP ports and fiber breakout panels, however we have some odds and ends that don't make sense there due to optic requirements (a few bidi and a few ER) and cost (just can't justify upgrading to 10Gbe hardware in many locations).

One other concern is that licensing costs can add up quickly.  In general, would this end up requiring the AFL?

--
Eldon

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:20 AM Richard McGovern <rmcgovern at juniper.net<mailto:rmcgovern at juniper.net>> wrote:
I might suggest you look at an EVPN based design instead.  This is going to be Juniper's #1 go to in the future.  I believe things like Junos Fusion and MC-LAG, etc. may still be supported, but secondary to EVPN and associated features.

What is your planned SD devices?  QFX5???

Richard McGovern
Sr Sales Engineer, Juniper Networks
978-618-3342


On 11/5/18, 8:32 PM, "Eldon Koyle" <ekoyle+puck.nether.net at gmail.com<mailto:ekoyle%2Bpuck.nether.net at gmail.com>> wrote:

    What kind of experiences (good or bad) have people had with Juniper's
    Fusion Provider edge?  Are there any limitations I should be aware of?

    I'm looking at it to simplify management in a campus network environment
    and to use features that are only available on the MX currently.

    --
    Eldon
    --
    I don't think the universe wants me to send this message