Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480

Chris Marlatt cmarlatt at
Fri Jul 18 11:43:33 UTC 2008

Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi all,
> An acquaintance who runs an ISP with an M7i on its border is looking to 
> upgrade, because the M7i is starting to creak from all the flesh-tone 
> MPEGs his customers are sharing. (How times have changed. Back when I 
> was chasing packets, it was flesh-tone JPEGs.)
> He's looking at the MX480 and the E300.
> The MX480 is attractive because the M7i has been stable as a rock, and 
> he's familiar with JUNOS.
> The E300 is attractive because it's half the price of the MX480, and has 
> the potential to hold layer-2 cards as well as layer-3 ports which makes 
> the price per port much more reasonable than the MX480. But he has no 
> experience with Force10 at any ISO layer higher than 2.
> He doesn't have any exotic requirements beyond OSPF, OSPFv3, BGP, IP and 
> IPv6. There's no MPLS in the picture, for example. However, he's going 
> to want four or five full tables plus a moderate load of peering routes 
> in there. And maybe VRRP.
> Thoughts from people who have tried one or the other, or both? Or who 
> have faced this kind of problem, and came up with a different answer?
> Feel free to send mail off-list; I can summarise if there is interest.
> Joe

I would avoid Force10 if at all possible. In the network I managed I've 
had some fairly surprising stability problems with their S series 
switches and feature problems (or lack there of) on their E series. 
Things you kind of scratch your head at and wonder what they were 
thinking. Juniper on the other hand is indeed a bit pricier but quite a 
stable platform. If he has to look at alternatives I would suggest 
Foundry, either the RX-8, MLX-8, or XMR-8000 (depending on requirements) 
for comparable models to the MX480.



More information about the NANOG mailing list