nanog mailing list archives
RE: Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480
From: "Martin Hannigan" <hannigan () verneglobal com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:02:38 -0000
-----Original Message----- From: Eric Van Tol [mailto:eric () atlantech net] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 11:03 AM To: 'Keith O'neill' Cc: nanog Subject: RE: Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480-----Original Message----- From: Keith O'neill [mailto:keith () pando com] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:35 AM To: Chris Marlatt Cc: nanog Subject: Re: Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480 ... Sure Foundry might be cheaper but I hear more complaining about Foundry than any other platform.I'd like to hear about the complaints regarding Foundry. Off-list is fine, as I believe this may be off-topic for NANOG. We've been considering using Foundry and during testing they seemed to work just fine, but as everyone knows, a lab environment rarely mimics real life. I found a few highly annoying quirks, most of them with the CLI (why are my config mode commands shown in my operational mode command history, including partial question-marked commands? argh!), but interoperability with both Juniper and Cisco in an MPLS lab environment didn't present any showstoppers.
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/ The CLI quirks are much lower on the totem pole than cost or performance. Best Regards, -M<
Current thread:
- Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper, (continued)
- Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Paul Stewart (Jul 18)
- Re: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Chris Heighway (Jul 18)
- Message not available
- RE: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Paul Stewart (Jul 18)
- RE: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Eric Van Tol (Jul 18)
- RE: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Paul Stewart (Jul 18)
- Re: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Doug McIntyre (Jul 20)
- RE: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Eric Van Tol (Jul 18)
- Re: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Matthew Elmore (Jul 21)
- RE: Cisco vs Adtran vs Juniper Paul Stewart (Jul 21)
- RE: Force10 E300 vs. Juniper MX480 Martin Hannigan (Jul 18)