We've happily displaced the ASR901, and ASR920 with Juniper's ACX1100 in most parts of our network. It has a few interesting limitations (IPSEC, NAT), but nothing that has caused us any problems doing P, PE and Aggregation work. ________________________________________ From: cisco-nsp [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019 9:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 is a ticking timebomb (CSCvk35460)
On 26/Jan/19 17:15, James Jun wrote: > One of the other reasons we're looking to phase out ASR920s over time is the > small > buffers. > > We also had an issue when oversubsribing shared on-chip buffers on the box > (by using child > policy-map to assign 100% queue on all ports), where sometimes, probably when > buffers > are exhausted, it freezes packet transmission on ports after a while, thus > causing an > outage. We ended up removing that policy-map and are now only allocating > 512KiB queue-limit > per 1G port to prevent exhaustion. But what would you replace it with? What else is out there? > I suppose MX104 with decent discount may be an option, but control-plane is > an issue. Juniper have binned that box. Mark. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
