Re: Failover how much complexity will it add?

[adel () baklawasecrets com]

Basically the organisation that I'm working for will not have the skills in house to support a linux or bsd box.  They 
will have trouble
with supporting the BGP configuration, however I don't think they will be happy with me if I leave them with a linux 
box when they
don't have linux/unix resource internally.  At least with a Cisco or Juniper they are familiar with IOS and it won't be 
too foreign to them.




On Sun  11:30 PM , "Renato Frederick" <frederick () dahype org> wrote:

> There are any problems with quagga+BSD/Linux that you know or something 
> like that?
>
> Or in your scenario a "cisco/juniper box" is a requirement?
>
> I'm asking this because I'm always running BGP with upstreams providers 
> using quagga on BSD and everything is fine until now.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: 
> Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 8:39 PM
> To: 
> Subject: Re: Failover how much complexity will it add?
>
> > So if my requirements are as follows:
> >
> > - BGP router capable of holding full Internet routing table. (whether I
>
> > go for partial or full, I think I want something with full capability).
> >
> > - Capable of pushing 100meg plus of mixed traffic.
> >
> > What are my options? I want to exclude openbsd, or linux with quagga. 
> > Probably looking at Cisco or Juniper products, but interested
> > in any other alternatives people suggest. I realise this is quite a
> broad 
> > question, but hoping this will provide a starting point. Oh and
> > if I have missed any specs I should have included above, please let me 
> > know.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Adel