Arista Layer3

Wed Mar 6 08:05:12 UTC 2019

Is there any reason to have 2M routes support for next 3 years?

--
Dmitry Sherman
Interhost Networks Ltd
Dmitry at interhost.net<mailto:Dmitry at interhost.net>
Mobile: +972-54-3181182
Office: +972-74-7029881
Web: www.interhost.co.il

From: NANOG <nanog-bounces at nanog.org> on behalf of Roel Parijs <roel.parijs at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 0:47
To: "nanog at nanog.org" <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Arista Layer3

We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista announced the full table BGP routing.
Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.

When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they added MSS clamping at the end of last year.

The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM <nanog at jack.fr.eu.org<mailto:nanog at jack.fr.eu.org>> wrote:
Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G

On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
> I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale.  My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE.  5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..
>
> David
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190306/d2c57bbb/attachment.html>