[195547] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 100G - Whitebox
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Sun Aug 20 12:07:13 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <1954258250.6444.1503243933932.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 09:07:07 -0700
To: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Aug 20, 2017, at 08:45, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
<snip>
>=20
> Any particular hardware platforms to go towards or avoid? Broadcom Tomahaw=
k seems to be quite popular with varying control planes. LINX went Edgecore,=
which was on my list given my experience with other Accton brands. Fibersto=
re has a switch where they actually publish the pricing vs. a bunch of myste=
ry.=20
Tomahawk and tomahawk 2 have precious little in the form of packet packet bu=
ffer (e.g. As little as 4 x 4MB for original tomahawk) which might be a prob=
lem in a environment where you need to rate convert 100G attached peers to a=
big bundle of 10s).
White box Broadcom dnx / jericho is somewhat less common but does exist.
That 40s are less popular I think is no surprise. They were / are largely co=
nsigned to datacenter applications.
> Thoughts?=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----=20
> Mike Hammett=20
> Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
> http://www.ics-il.com=20
>=20
> Midwest-IX=20
> http://www.midwest-ix.com=20
>=20
