nanog mailing list archives
MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design)
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 10:40:59 +0200
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 9:55 AM Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu> wrote:
MX204 be good for that ?I'm sure it will be - it's an MPC7 in a cage :-).
Anyone know why MX204 has so few ports? It seems like it only has WAN side used, leaving FAB side entirely unused, throwing away 50% of free capacity. MX80/MX104 have both sides for revenue ports. I would GLADLY take 50% more ports in MX204, without taking any more PPS or QoS bandwidth. Is this because we as a community are so anal towards vendors about PPS performance that JNPR marketing forbade them making pizza-box MPC7 using all the capacity in fears of people being angry about not being able to do good PPS on all ports? As far as I understand, it would have been zero cost to have double ports in MX204, if you don't want to use them, there is capex efficient vendor-agnostic, single-spare solution[0] to turn any platform back into full PPS platform. I want my free ports, in metro application you are limited by your east+west capacity and you can never see more PPS, but you want to add more edges. [0] http://z.ip.fi/BVLE -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Mohammad Khalil (Feb 13)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Saku Ytti (Feb 13)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Mark Tinka (Feb 13)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Alain Hebert (Feb 14)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Mark Tinka (Feb 14)
- RE: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Aaron Gould (Feb 14)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Mark Tinka (Feb 14)
- MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) Saku Ytti (Feb 15)
- Re: MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) Mark Tinka (Feb 15)
- RE: MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) Phil Lavin (Feb 15)
- Re: MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) Saku Ytti (Feb 15)
- RE: MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) Phil Lavin (Feb 15)
- Re: MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) Mark Tinka (Feb 15)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Mark Tinka (Feb 13)
- RE: MX204 applications, (was about BGP RR design) adamv0025 (Feb 19)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Saku Ytti (Feb 13)
- Re: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector Jason Lixfeld (Feb 19)
- RE: BGP topological vs centralized route reflector adamv0025 (Feb 19)