Mx204 alternative

Mon Sep 2 08:18:02 UTC 2019

On 8/Aug/19 06:46, Randy Carpenter wrote:

> If you don't require redundant routing engines, there is nothing from
> Juniper that will cost less and have the capacity you require. In
> fact, there really aren't any cheaper MX options at all, other than
> the kneecapped MX80 and MX104 variants. MX204 is really a nice box. I
> only wish they had a redundant version.

The MX80 and MX104 have no business being in any modern conversation
these days :-).

For what you could do with it, the MX204 is pretty neat. Juniper have
never really considered the Metro in a serious way, because if they did,
they'd have an MX204-1G (if you can call it that).

They've lost plenty of ground to Cisco's ASR920 (and older MX3600X) on
the back of this.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190902/7b2f955f/attachment.html>