[109866] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: e300 vs mx240 for border router ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael J McCafferty)
Fri Dec 12 17:35:57 2008
From: Michael J McCafferty <mike@m5computersecurity.com>
To: nanog <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <4942E56D.5060105@craigslist.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:37:05 -0800
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Leslie,
Can you summarize any other info you may have learned in the private
responses for the benefit of those that are interested ?
I am not at all familiar with the Force10s, am buying new border routers
now.
Thanks,
Mike
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 14:27 -0800, Leslie wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who wrote back privately --
>
> I also didn't know that force10 now has dual-cam linecards which raises
> the amount of routes it can handle
>
> Leslie wrote:
> > Hey nanog-izens
> >
> > So for routers that are touching our transit and (hopefully soon) future
> > peering, we're looking at both the force10 e300's and juniper mx240's.
> > The e300's are cheap but I have heard some rumors/talk of falling over
> > when it has to deal with large numbers of prefixes and routes? The
> > mx240's are nice but the cost difference is enormous. Does anyone have
> > experience with e300's running into issues with large routing tables?
> > Are there any tricks/tips that work around any issues (if they exist?)
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > Leslie
>
--
************************************************************
Michael J. McCafferty
Principal, Security Engineer
M5 Hosting
http://www.m5hosting.com
You can have your own custom Dedicated Server up and running today !
RedHat Enterprise, CentOS, Ubuntu, Debian, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and more
************************************************************
