Reliability of Juniper MIC3-3D-1X100GE-CFP and CFP in general

Joel Jaeggli joelja at bogus.com
Thu Jun 22 15:24:20 CST 2017


Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 22, 2017, at 07:38, Eric Dugas <edugas at unknowndevice.ca> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> We're planning to phase out some 10G link-aggregations in favor of 100G
> interfaces. We've been looking at buying MIC3-3D-1X100GE-CFP, MPC3E and
> Fiberstore CFPs.
> 
> I've been told that CFPs (in general) weren't that reliable. They were
> kinda "replaced" almost a year and a half or so after its introduction by
> CFP2 and then by CFP4 and so on. Size and power consumption aside, are the
> MIC3-3D-1X100GE-CFP and CFP modules reliable at all? Are they the SFP-TX of
> the 100GBase?

CFP has been around a while, like 8 years at this point. CFP2 and CFP4 are significantly smaller have accordingly lower power budgets and do not include the DSP on board (the linecard for cfp/2/4/8 differs significantly respecting level of integration components and so forth and also port count).

Apart from the resulting low port density per card, which makes them unsuitable for a number applications they're mature products at this point.
> 
> Eric
> 



More information about the NANOG mailing list