[148999] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 10G switchrecommendaton
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Vollebregt)
Fri Jan 27 07:24:54 2012
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:23:50 +0100
From: Tim Vollebregt <tim@interworx.nl>
To: James Braunegg <james.braunegg@micron21.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA7E867D448D8B489EFF2E97E266038A1DAD409C@RA-EX01.raprinting.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
2,5MB shared approximately.
Aggregating 10G with microbursts is definately a no-go on such box.
-Tim
On 27-01-12 12:33, James Braunegg wrote:
> How small is the buffer on the EX4500 ??
>
> Kindest Regards
>
> James Braunegg
> W: 1300 769 972 | M: 0488 997 207 | D: (03) 9751 7616
> E: james.braunegg@micron21.com | ABN: 12 109 977 666
>
>
>
> This message is intended for the addressee named above. It may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not use, copy, distribute or disclose it to anyone other than the addressee. If you have received this message in error please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from your computer.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Vollebregt [mailto:tim@interworx.nl]
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 8:35 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: 10G switchrecommendaton
>
> I would not recommend EX4500 as an 10G aggregator switch, it has really small buffers.
>
> EX3300 as TOR
> EX82** as 10G aggregator
>
> -Tim
>
> On 26-01-12 22:13, Raul Rodriguez wrote:
>> Juniper EX4500.
>>
>> -RR
>>
>> On 1/26/12, Deric Kwok<deric.kwok2000@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> I would like to have 10G switchrecommendaton Ipref software can test
>>> around 9.2G but we can have congestion over 6G in single port!
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>>
