Juniper hardware recommendation

Baldur Norddahl 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.

Regards

Baldur
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210510/a150070b/attachment.html>


More information about the NANOG mailing list