Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480

Martin Hannigan hannigan at verneglobal.com
Fri Jul 18 11:02:38 CDT 2008


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Van Tol [mailto:eric at atlantech.net]
> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 11:03 AM
> To: 'Keith O'neill'
> Cc: nanog
> Subject: RE: Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Keith O'neill [mailto:keith at pando.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:35 AM
> > To: Chris Marlatt
> > Cc: nanog
> > Subject: Re: Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480
> >
> > ...
> > Sure Foundry might be cheaper but I hear
> > more complaining about Foundry than any other platform.
> >
> 
> I'd like to hear about the complaints regarding Foundry.  Off-list is
> fine, as I believe this may be off-topic for NANOG.  We've been
> considering using Foundry and during testing they seemed to work just
> fine, but as everyone knows, a lab environment rarely mimics real life.
> I found a few highly annoying quirks, most of them with the CLI (why
> are my config mode commands shown in my operational mode command
> history, including partial question-marked commands? argh!), but
> interoperability with both Juniper and Cisco in an MPLS lab environment
> didn't present any showstoppers.
> 


     http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/


The CLI quirks are much lower on the totem pole than cost or performance. 


Best Regards,

-M<




More information about the NANOG mailing list