Juniper hardware recommendation
baldur.norddahl at gmail.com
Mon May 10 15:46:26 UTC 2021
man. 10. maj 2021 16.20 skrev <aaron1 at gvtc.com>:
> 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.
It is my understanding that acx5448 is much more capable than the older
acx5048. It will definitely do both l2vpn and l3vpn on mpls (what we use
acx5448 / acx710 for).
The main limitation is that it will not do full dfz table and not more
exotic stuff like subscriber management.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NANOG