[188382] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Low density Juniper (or alternative) Edge
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ML-NANOG-Stefan-Jakob)
Sun Mar 20 10:29:01 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <0a03a53f-b7c1-52e0-800f-9bce6f87ca08@seacom.mu>
From: ML-NANOG-Stefan-Jakob <nanog@yacl.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:14:49 +0000
To: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Hi Mark,
Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> schrieb am So., 28. Feb. 2016 07:13:
>
>
> On 3/Feb/16 09:58, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> > Typically the features that fall by the wayside first are: reasonable
> > port buffers, qos knobs and decent lag/ecmp hashing support for mpls
> > packets.
>
> Cisco, in general, are suffering here, i.e., QoS on LAG's.
>
> IOS, IOS XE and IOS XR suffer massively.
>
> We find that Junos does a better job here.
>
> Mark.
>
Do yo have more details what's wrong with the XR platform?
Which hardware do we talk about and which XR version is your statement
applying?
Rgds, Stefan
>
