Juniper hardware recommendation
mark at tinka.africa
Mon May 10 14:25:21 UTC 2021
On 5/10/21 16:19, aaron1 at gvtc.com wrote:
> I prefer MX204 over the ACX5048. The ACX5048 can’t add L3 interface
> to an mpls layer 2 type of service. There are other limitations to
> the ACX5048 that cause me to want to possibly replace them with
> MX204’s. But in defense of the ACX5048, we have gotten some good
> mileage (a few years now) of good resi/busi bb over vrf’s and also
> carrier ethernet for businesses and lots of cell backhaul… so they are
> good for that. I’ve heard the ACX5448 was even better.
Trio will always provide better features, but come with the price tag to
> I’m looking at the MX240 for the SCB3E MPC10E hefty with 100 gig ports
You might want to look at the MX10003, in that case, as well. We are
deploying those for 100Gbps service (customer-facing). Works out cheaper
than offering 100Gbps service on the MX240/480/960 for the same task.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NANOG