[AusNOG] Cisco ASR 1004 vs Juniper MX 80

Sun Sep 26 23:44:18 EST 2010

Dear Matt

Thanks for your feedback on the Juniper MX 80 ! Very interesting with regards to hardware Netflow (jflow) not currently being supported by the MX 80... this was something I was unaware of ! I Guess that where the MX 240 has its advantage having dedicated hardware for DPC functions.

So the million dollar question, how are you finding the ASR's ? How was your experience with Cisco ?

Kindest Regards

James Braunegg
W:  1300 769 972  |  M:  0488 997 207 |  D:  (03) 9751 7616
E:   james.braunegg at micron21.com<mailto:james.braunegg at micron21.com>  |  ABN:  85 126 029 203

[Description: Description: Description: M21.jpg]

This message is intended for the addressee named above. It may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not use, copy, distribute or disclose it to anyone other than the addressee. If you have received this message in error please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from your computer.

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Matt Moor
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:33 PM
To: Skeeve Stevens
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Cisco ASR 1004 vs Juniper MX 80

To be honest, no real idea. LNS isn't in our requirements, so I never asked/looked. I would suppose it depends on whether or not the LNS work is done in the ASICs or not. They seem to be very efficient and pumping through packets, whilst the general purpose CPU doesn't seem to be very powerful.

For the record, Juniper indicated that hardware netflow is on the roadmap, but not within the (short) time frames we were looking at.

- Matt

On 26/09/10 2:55 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
Matt,

So what would you think of the box as an LNS (when the code arrives) and Netflow is not necessary (done elsewhere - at the border).

...Skeeve

--
Skeeve Stevens, CEO
eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
skeeve at eintellego.net<mailto:skeeve at eintellego.net> / www.eintellego.net<http://www.eintellego.net>
Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; facebook.com/eintellego
--
eintellego - The Experts that the Experts call
- Juniper - HP Networking - CIsco - Arista -

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net> [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Matt Moor
Sent: Sunday, 26 September 2010 1:35 PM
To: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Cisco ASR 1004 vs Juniper MX 80

We just went through exactly the same decision process, and ended up purchasing ASR1004s with ESP10s and the 8x1Gb card. These were more expensive than the MX80s, but the killer was that the MX80 lacked hardware netflow support - limiting real-world throughput (with netflow enabled and a 1:1 sample rate) to ~400Mb/s.

A pity, because as you say, the MX80 looks like a terrific box on paper, and I have a strong preference towards how Juniper manages configuration change (commit, etc). I think we'll be happy with the ASRs, though - they're a nice platform, and the RP2 looks to be very quick.

Cheers,

Matt

On 23/09/10 12:34 PM, James Braunegg wrote:
Hey guys,

We are looking at replacing two of our pop site's edge routers and after all the discussions this week on the Cisco 6500 platform on why/not to use it I thought this would be a nice follow up post.

Our requirements for this installation are simple: we want control and stability, and we only need 10 x 1 gb Ethernet interfaces max at this time.

We are looking at 4 x Cisco ASR 1004 would be configured with 2 x 5 port gig interface card (40GB total system capacity, 20Mpps)

Or

We are looking at 4 x Juniper MX 80 which comes with 48 x 1gb ports and 4 x 10gb ports (I believe)

Juniper markets the MX 80 as twice the performance at half the price (80GB total system capacity, 65Mpps)

The way I see it, it's now really a Cisco vs Juniper argument. Years ago I loved Juniper the SSG platform which was fantastic and never missed a beat, although the new Juniper SRX platform has left me really questioning Juniper on why they would release a platform with countless bugs and issues.

These Juniper issues have implanted fear in my mind and questioning if it's just a product line issue (i.e. the SRX) or a Juniper issue in general. But on paper the Juniper MX 80 looks fantastic!

I would really love to hear some technical information or even better field information on pros and cons for each platform, arguments both for and against each. I'm sure Cisco has their fair share of issues also... so let's discuss!

Kindest Regards

James Braunegg
W:  1300 769 972  |  M:  0488 997 207 |  D:  (03) 9751 7616
E:   james.braunegg at micron21.com<mailto:james.braunegg at micron21.com>  |  ABN:  85 126 029 203

[Description: Description: Description: M21.jpg]

This message is intended for the addressee named above. It may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not use, copy, distribute or disclose it to anyone other than the addressee. If you have received this message in error please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from your computer.

_______________________________________________

AusNOG mailing list

AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>

http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100926/913c0d69/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2683 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100926/913c0d69/attachment.jpg>