Juniper MX Sizing
Jason Bothe
jason at rice.edu
Fri Dec 5 17:08:15 UTC 2014
Graham,
We use both the MX240 and MX480 (for 100G) 1800REs. Very happy with this hardware.
Jason Bothe, Manager of Networking
o +1 713 348 5500
m +1 713 703 3552
jason at rice.edu
On 5, Dec 2014, at 10:59 AM, Graham Johnston <johnstong at westmancom.com> wrote:
> I am wondering if anyone can provide their real world experience about sizing Juniper MX routers as it relates to BGP. I am needing a device that has a mix of layer 2 and 3 features, including MPLS, that will have a very low port count requirement that will primarily be used at a remote POP site to connect to the local IX as well as one or two full route transit providers. The MX104 has what I need from a physical standpoint and a data plane standpoint, as well as power consumption figures. My only concern is whether the REs have enough horsepower to churn through the convergence calculations at a rate that operators in this situation would find acceptable. I realize that 'acceptable' is a moving target so I would happily accept feedback from people using them as to how long it takes and their happiness with the product.
>
> For those of you that deem the MX104 unacceptable in this kind of role and moved up to the MX240, what RE did you elect to use?
>
> Thanks,
> Graham Johnston
> Network Planner
> Westman Communications Group
> 204.717.2829
> johnstong at westmancom.com<mailto:johnstong at westmancom.com>
> P think green; don't print this email.
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list