Saku, Jericho is in no sense a low end chip, while there are some scale limitations (what can be done with SuperFEC, some bridging related stuff), from functionality prospective it is a very capable silicon.
One has to: Understand how to program it properly (recursiveness, ECMP’s, etc) Know how to enhance SDK Have a rather rich control plane, which can be translated into rich forwarding functionality :-) I’m not familiar with Arista’s feature set NCS with XR would be a good proof Watch for Jericho updates from DNX Cheers, Jeff On 4/23/16, 11:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Saku Ytti" <nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of s...@ytti.fi> wrote: >On 23 April 2016 at 10:52, Tom Hill <t...@ninjabadger.net> wrote: >> In broad strokes: for your money you're either getting port density, or >> more features per port. The only difference here is that there's >> suddenly more TCAM on the device, and I still don't see the above >> changing too drastically. > >Yeah OP is comparing high touch chip (MX104) to low touch chip >(Jericho) that is not fair comparison. And cost is what customer is >willing to pay, regardless of sticker on the box. No one will pay >significant mark-up for another sticker, I've never seen in RFP >significant differences in comparable products. > >Fairer comparison would be QFX10k, instead of MX104. QFX10k is AFAIK >only product in this segment which is not using Jericho. If this is >competitive advantage or risk, jury is still out, I lean towards >competitive advantage, mainly due to its memory design. > >-- > ++ytti
