[119365] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leslie)
Mon Nov 16 16:21:01 2009
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:20:19 -0800
From: Leslie <leslie@craigslist.org>
To: Tore Anderson <tore@linpro.no>
In-Reply-To: <4B01862E.8090101@linpro.no>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, net-ops@monolith-networks.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Tore Anderson wrote:
> * Gary Mackenzie
>
>> I had looked briefly, does anybody here actually use them as peering
>> routers? I've seen a few implementations using them in the MPLS P and
>> PE router roles but never as border routers.
>
> We've been using the MX-es as border routers for some time now. It's a
> role that suits them very well in my opinion, no problems at all so far.
> I'll be very surprised if we don't end up using MX-es in our next PoP
> as well.
>
> Best regards,
We're using them as border routers and love them. As long as you don't
need sonet, i think it's a great choice.
Leslie
