nanog mailing list archives
Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 08:13:41 +0200
On 3/Feb/16 09:58, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Typically the features that fall by the wayside first are: reasonable port buffers, qos knobs and decent lag/ecmp hashing support for mpls packets.
Cisco, in general, are suffering here, i.e., QoS on LAG's. IOS, IOS XE and IOS XR suffer massively. We find that Junos does a better job here. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge, (continued)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Cameron Ferdinands (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge David Bass (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Josh Reynolds (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge David Bass (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Josh Reynolds (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Mike Hammett (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Mark Tinka (Feb 28)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Cameron Ferdinands (Feb 06)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Colton Conor (Feb 03)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Shawn L (Feb 03)
- Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge Mark Tinka (Feb 27)