> We're going to be getting some Arista gear soon and this issue came
> up. They made the same noises and vague overtures of "well, you
> *might* have problems with TAC if you go with 3rd party optics"...
> until I said "Oh really- well, that's a deal breaker, we can't really
> even consider that".
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Timothy Creswick
wrote:
> Not in response to any point specifically, but the major issue which stopped
> us buying Arista a few months ago was the rather out-dated attitude to 3rd
> party transceiver support.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people running Arista
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 1:33 AM, lincoln dale wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Peter Kranz
> wrote:
>
>> Curious if you have any thoughts on the longevity of the 7500R
>> and 7280R survival's with IPv4 full tables? How full are you seeing the
>> TCAM getting today (I'm assuming
> Just wanted to interject, the port density of the Arista switches is quite
> impressive, especially considering the price point they're at.
Not in response to any point specifically, but the major issue which stopped us
buying Arista a few months ago was the rather out-dated attitude to 3rd par
Laszln,
Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:47:45PM +, Laszlo Hanyecz wrote:
> On 2016-04-28 11:06, Alain Hebert wrote:
> >
> > Well,
> >
> > Once you eliminate the ~160k superfluous prefixes (last time I
> > checked)... This is a none issue.
> >
> > Some work on some sort summary functio
On 2016-04-28 11:06, Alain Hebert wrote:
Well,
Once you eliminate the ~160k superfluous prefixes (last time I
checked)... This is a none issue.
Some work on some sort summary function would keep those devices
alive... but we all know there is more money to be made the faster t
Well,
Once you eliminate the ~160k superfluous prefixes (last time I
checked)... This is a none issue.
Some work on some sort summary function would keep those devices
alive... but we all know there is more money to be made the faster the
device become obsolete :(
-
Alain Heber
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Peter Kranz wrote:
> Curious if you have any thoughts on the longevity of the 7500R and
> 7280R survival's with IPv4 full tables? How full are you seeing the TCAM
> getting today (I'm assuming they are doing some form of selective
> download)? And if we ar
Ryan,
Curious if you have any thoughts on the longevity of the 7500R and
7280R survival's with IPv4 full tables? How full are you seeing the TCAM
getting today (I'm assuming they are doing some form of selective download)?
And if we are currently adding 100k/routes a year, how much longe
Just wanted to interject, the port density of the Arista switches is quite
impressive, especially considering the price point they're at.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Ryan Woolley
wrote:
> While the QFX in general is similar to Jericho-based platforms, I think the
> QFX10002 is perhaps not
While the QFX in general is similar to Jericho-based platforms, I think the
QFX10002 is perhaps not an ideal comparison. At 100G, there is a
significant density penalty on that platform, as you can use all 36 ports
at 40G, but only 12 ports at 100G.
BGP convergence in the newer EOS releases is in
IOS-XR on ASR 9k and Junos on MX.
For our use case, there's no longer anything limiting as compared to those
platforms. BGP policy is perhaps not as rich as you might be used to if
your experience is with the sort of routers traditionally marketed to
service providers, but I'm sure that will get
Ryan,
What routing platform were you coming from before? What features does
Arista not have that you find limiting that the old platform did have?
How does Astira's Sflow only compare to having Cisco Netflow or Juniper
JFlow for traffic monitoring which I assume Netflix does alot of?
On Wed, Apr
Hey Colton,
Comments inline:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Colton Conor
wrote:
> NANOG,
>
> I know Arista is typically a switch manufacturer, but with their recently
> announced Arista 7500R Series and soon to be announced but already shipping
> 7280R Series Arista is officially getting into
Colton Conor wrote:
> I know Arista is typically a switch manufacturer, but with their recently
> announced Arista 7500R Series and soon to be announced but already
shipping
> 7280R Series Arista is officially getting into the routing game. The fixed
> 1U 7280R Series looks quite impressive. The 75
>
> > High Touch / Low Touch
>
> High touch means very general purpose NPU, with off-chip memory. Low
> touch means usually ASIC or otherwise simplified pipeline and on-chip
> memory. Granted Jericho can support off-chip memory too.
>
> L3 switches are canonical example of low touch. EZchip, Trio,
On 24 April 2016 at 09:08, Colton Conor wrote:
Hey,
> I guess you are right the QFX10002-36Q is probably a better comparison. But
> let's be honest, Juniper is not going to sell a QFX10002-36Q for less than
> $20k like Arista will do for a semi- similar box. Even with a high discount
> (like 90
Saku,
I guess you are right the QFX10002-36Q is probably a better comparison. But
let's be honest, Juniper is not going to sell a QFX10002-36Q for less than
$20k like Arista will do for a semi- similar box. Even with a high discount
(like 90 percent off list), the Juniper QFX10002-36Q at $360k lis
Got it, thanks for the explanation!
> -Original Message-
> From: Saku Ytti [mailto:s...@ytti.fi]
> Sent: Sunday, 24 April, 2016 11:03
> To: Keith Medcalf
> Cc: nanog list
> Subject: Re: Arista Routing Solutions
>
> On 24 April 2016 at 05:14, Keith Medcalf wrote
On 24 April 2016 at 05:14, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> High Touch / Low Touch
High touch means very general purpose NPU, with off-chip memory. Low
touch means usually ASIC or otherwise simplified pipeline and on-chip
memory. Granted Jericho can support off-chip memory too.
L3 switches are canonical
ng supervision unless you want to change
something?
Or is it just a strange translation for functionality (as in High End / Low
End)?
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Saku Ytti
> Sent: Saturday, 23 April, 2016 14:21
> To: Tom
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 ho
On 23 April 2016 at 10:52, Tom Hill 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 compar
On 20/04/16 15:37, Colton Conor wrote:
> Can the Arista EOS software combine with their hardware based on the
> Broadcom Jericho chipset truly compete with the custom chipsets and
> accompanying software from the big guys?
In broad strokes: for your money you're either getting port density, or
mo
24 matches
Mail list logo
