<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/10/21 16:19, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aaron1@gvtc.com">aaron1@gvtc.com</a>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:006601d745a7$8f361460$ada23d20$@gvtc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style>@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Trio will always provide better features, but come with the price
tag to boot.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:006601d745a7$8f361460$ada23d20$@gvtc.com">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I’m looking at the MX240 for the SCB3E
MPC10E hefty with 100 gig ports</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</body>
</html>