Hi, On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:05:36PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote: > I also find the ASR9001 a lot slower than the ASR1000 (RP2).
In which regards? BGP convergence, general stuff, or "just the filesystem
annoyance"? Curious, because I haven't seen anything as fast for BGP as
the ASR9k yet ("session up to full table loaded" in less than 45 seconds),
but I have no experience with ASR1k.
[..]
> Juniper are working on a new MX unit, Intel-based, as an upgrade to the
> MX104. So anyone who was holding out for a sane RE on the MX104 can
> start breathing now.
Why MX104 got a PPC based RE to start with, and got a different form
factor so MX240 REs wouldn't fit, is one of the deep mysteries I'm not
sure I ever want to know more about.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
