[j-nsp] MX204 vs. MX240??

[Bill Blackford]

We evaluated the 204. It met our current needs for port density, but not future.  A sweet upgrade path from an 80 or 104 though!

Pay close attention to the port allocations. They’re a slight puzzle:

https://apps.juniper.net/home/port-checker/index.html

-b 


> On Nov 8, 2019, at 08:40, Clarke Morledge <chmorl at wm.edu> wrote:
> 
> I wanted to resurrect an old thread about the MX204, from a year and a half ago:
> 
> https://lists.gt.net/nsp/juniper/64290
> 
> My understanding is that the MX204 is a 1 RU MPC7, but with a few modifications. I understand that the eight 10Gig ports have been modified to allow for 1 Gig transceivers as well, and perhaps that the QSFP ports can accommodate a pigtail for providing a bunch of 1 Gig connections, if necessary.
> 
> The 10/40/100 capabilities of the MPC7 look great, but there are few isolated cases where I need to support legacy 1 gig, and the MX204 can now handle that. Is this true?
> 
> Also, I understand that the MX204 CPU and other resources are a vast improvement over the MX80, and that the MX204 can handle multiple full Internet route BGP feeds, just as well as the MX240 REs can, without compromise in performance.
> 
> The newer VM support inside the RE makes the requirements for an additional RE less important now, according to my understanding.
> 
> So, if you do not need a lot of speeds and feeds, and can live without a physical backup RE, the MX204 would be a good alternative to a MX240.
> 
> Have I made accurate assumptions??
> 
> 
> Clarke Morledge
> Network Engineering
> Information Technology
> Jones Hall (Room 18)
> 200 Ukrop Way
> Williamsburg VA 23187
> William & Mary
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp