> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:14:52 -0000 (GMT) > From: "Gary Mackenzie" <net-...@monolith-networks.net> > > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 09:04, Dale W. Carder <dwcar...@wisc.edu> wrote: > >> > >> On Nov 16, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Gary Mackenzie wrote: > >> > >>> Having slightly lost track of what everybody is using for peering > >>> routers > >>> these days, what is the consensus about the best alternative to Juniper > >>> M > >>> series routers? > >> > >> have you looked at the MX series? > > > > +1 > > ~Chris > > > >> > >> Dale > >> > > I had looked briefly, does anybody here actually use them as peering > routers? I've seen a few implementations using them in the MPLS P and PE > router roles but never as border routers. > > If there is some precedent for using them in this role that's good to hear > and I'll take another look, I was loath to move away from Juniper as our > current boxes are been the model of reliability.
We use them as peering routers and are in the process of upgrading all of our peering routers to MX boxes. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: ober...@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751
