Juniper hardware recommendation

Saku Ytti saku at
Sat May 8 06:26:35 UTC 2021

On Sat, 8 May 2021 at 00:17, Adam Thompson <athompson at> wrote:

>    - Skip the MX480 (and up), it’s just too expensive.  Consider an
>    EX9200 instead, which can do 90% of the same functions.  (If you can afford
>    an MX480 or MX960, by all means, get one!)
> MX240 and MX480 cost 25k list price. Sheetmetal doesn't affect your price.
If you can't fit MX960 or MX480 to your rack buy MX240.

>    - MX240 is reasonable, but dated.  A pair of MX204s in HA would make
>    more sense, to me.
> MX960, MX480, MX240 all take the latest gen SCBE3 fabric and MPC10E

>    - Skip the MX 2k/10k series – they don’t support SFP+ interfaces!
>    (“No 10G WDM for you!”)  Also no 1G, you need a separate step-down switch
>    for that.  I don’t know what SP Juniper thinks they’re targeting with these.
> MX2k of course does support SFP+, considering it takes all the linecard
MX240, MX480, MX960, except MPC10E.
MX10k, talk to your account team, you'll have your card RSN.

>    - 1U/2U EX/QFX are reasonable edge devices as long as you’ve verified
>    they can do what you need.  Not core-router class IMHO.
> This may require a very liberal definition of edge. Of course they are
very feature and scale poor devices. But it is usually the opposite, more
devices fit core role, than edge role, as edge is where the scale and
features are.

>    - If you don’t already know that you want a PTX, then you don’t want a
>    PTX.  The product is fine, but niche, and has the same interface
>    limitations as MX10k.
> PTX is more competitor to J2 boxes, MX is more competitor to Lightspeed,
Solar and FP. Like you said for EX/QFX, it is true here also. For NPU based
boxes like Trio, you don't have to know very well what you're going do with
the boxes during their lifecycle, it'll work whatever it'll be. For
pipeline based boxes like PE/BT, you're taking much larger risk with some
CAPEX benefits.

>    - ACX: MEF-compliant mini-MX, basically.  Edge device only, pairs well
>    with an MX480 (IIRC).  Top-end are exceptions: ACX5k/7k might work,
>    depending on what you need it to do.  Not normally deployed as a core
>    router.
> ACX are merchant, BRCM J2 and below. So they have much more similar
position to PTX than ACX from silicon POV, but from marketing POV they are
seeking metro installations, your front-plate demand may drive you to ACX.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list