nanog mailing list archives
Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives
From: "Gary Mackenzie" <net-ops () monolith-networks net>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:14:52 -0000 (GMT)
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 09:04, Dale W. Carder <dwcarder () wisc edu> wrote:On Nov 16, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Gary Mackenzie wrote:Having slightly lost track of what everybody is using for peering routers these days, what is the consensus about the best alternative to Juniper M series routers?have you looked at the MX series?+1 ~ChrisDale
I had looked briefly, does anybody here actually use them as peering routers? I've seen a few implementations using them in the MPLS P and PE router roles but never as border routers. If there is some precedent for using them in this role that's good to hear and I'll take another look, I was loath to move away from Juniper as our current boxes are been the model of reliability. Cheers Gary
Current thread:
- Juniper M120 Alternatives Gary Mackenzie (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Dale W. Carder (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Chris Grundemann (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Gary Mackenzie (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives sthaug (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Tore Anderson (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Leslie (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Daniel Roesen (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Randy Bush (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Richard A Steenbergen (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Jack Bates (Nov 17)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Richard A Steenbergen (Nov 17)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Paul Cosgrove (Nov 18)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Phil Pierotti (Nov 18)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Chris Grundemann (Nov 16)
- Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives Dale W. Carder (Nov 16)