Mailing List Archive: nsp: juniper

ASR1002 Comparitive

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Kris at amy

Nov 17, 2009, 5:59 PM

Post #1 of 27 (1535 views)
Permalink

ASR1002 Comparitive

Hi All,

I’m just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?

It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit more expensive.

Regards,
Kris
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

BBlackford at nwresd

Nov 17, 2009, 7:58 PM

Post #2 of 27 (1488 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison. The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on your supplier should be competitively priced with an ASR1002.

J-care on it seems higher than smartnet if you can believe that.

-b

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Kris Amy
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:59 PM
To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive

Hi All,

I'm just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?

It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit more expensive.

Regards,
Kris
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Kris at amy

Nov 17, 2009, 8:49 PM

Post #3 of 27 (1484 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

>From the pricing I have received it seems the M7i is quite a bit more.

An ASR1002-F (which is all we really need) is approx $16k.
An M7i is $30k.

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 1:58 PM, "Bill Blackford" <BBlackford [at] nwresd> wrote:

> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison. The performance numbers
> are almost exact and depending on your supplier should be competitively priced
> with an ASR1002.
>
> J-care on it seems higher than smartnet if you can believe that.
>
> -b
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Kris Amy
> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:59 PM
> To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
> Subject: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'm just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?
>
> It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit more
> expensive.
>
> Regards,
> Kris
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Kris at amy

Nov 17, 2009, 9:40 PM

Post #4 of 27 (1489 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

My requirements are fairly simple.

2-3 full BGP tables
120-300 MB of traffic
Ethernet only
Netflow with 1:1 sampling

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 1:18 PM, "Tommy Perniciaro" <TPerniciaro [at] accuvant> wrote:

> Depends on what your requirements are, any oc3? Or just Ethernet ?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 17, 2009, at 6:01 PM, "Kris Amy" <Kris [at] amy> wrote:
>
>>

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Kris at amy

Nov 17, 2009, 9:41 PM

Post #5 of 27 (1484 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

I have briefly tested a j2320 before going to an SRX240.

The both the J and the SRX have gone to 100% cpu with 20meg of traffic and
1:1 netflow.

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 2:58 PM, "Tommy Perniciaro" <TPerniciaro [at] accuvant> wrote:

> Have you checked out the j6350?
>
> It's not apples to apples but none of the juniper line really lines up
> with asr1000's
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 17, 2009, at 8:49 PM, "Kris Amy" <Kris [at] amy> wrote:
>
>>> From the pricing I have received it seems the M7i is quite a bit
>>> more.
>>
>> An ASR1002-F (which is all we really need) is approx $16k.
>> An M7i is $30k.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kris
>>
>>
>> On 18/11/09 1:58 PM, "Bill Blackford" <BBlackford [at] nwresd>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison. The
>>> performance numbers
>>> are almost exact and depending on your supplier should be
>>> competitively priced
>>> with an ASR1002.
>>>
>>> J-care on it seems higher than smartnet if you can believe that.
>>>
>>> -b
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
>>> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Kris Amy
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:59 PM
>>> To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
>>> Subject: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I'm just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?
>>>
>>> It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit
>>> more
>>> expensive.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kris
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

illcritikz at gmail

Nov 17, 2009, 10:14 PM

Post #6 of 27 (1485 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

If budget is a real concern..

Assuming you are not planning on pumping tiny packets through this (ie
dedicated voip router etc.) maybe you should take a look at something like a
Cisco 3845, will do close to 300Mbs at 64-byte packets(so obviously a lot
more with standard profile traffic sizes) and offers a couple of GigE ports
and with 1GB ram in it will do your full tables, I can't see it having a
problem with non-sampled netflow but if you are really worried about that
just ask your local SE when you purchase, is there a specific timer you need
to run on your netflow to have such an issue with it?

If you are smart about sourcing your RAM you could probably get this for
around 10k,(maybe less)... haven't looked at a Cisco price list for a while
though so don't hold me to that but I can't see it being too much more.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Kris Amy <Kris [at] amy> wrote:

> I have briefly tested a j2320 before going to an SRX240.
>
> The both the J and the SRX have gone to 100% cpu with 20meg of traffic and
> 1:1 netflow.
>
> Regards,
> Kris
>
>
> On 18/11/09 2:58 PM, "Tommy Perniciaro" <TPerniciaro [at] accuvant> wrote:
>
> > Have you checked out the j6350?
> >
> > It's not apples to apples but none of the juniper line really lines up
> > with asr1000's
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Nov 17, 2009, at 8:49 PM, "Kris Amy" <Kris [at] amy> wrote:
> >
> >>> From the pricing I have received it seems the M7i is quite a bit
> >>> more.
> >>
> >> An ASR1002-F (which is all we really need) is approx $16k.
> >> An M7i is $30k.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Kris
> >>
> >>
> >> On 18/11/09 1:58 PM, "Bill Blackford" <BBlackford [at] nwresd>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison. The
> >>> performance numbers
> >>> are almost exact and depending on your supplier should be
> >>> competitively priced
> >>> with an ASR1002.
> >>>
> >>> J-care on it seems higher than smartnet if you can believe that.
> >>>
> >>> -b
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
> >>> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Kris Amy
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:59 PM
> >>> To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
> >>> Subject: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
> >>>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> I'm just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?
> >>>
> >>> It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit
> >>> more
> >>> expensive.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Kris
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

rdobbins at arbor

Nov 17, 2009, 11:02 PM

Post #7 of 27 (1488 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Nov 18, 2009, at 1:14 PM, Ben Steele wrote:

> I can't see it having a problem with non-sampled netflow but if you are really worried about that
> just ask your local SE when you purchase, is there a specific timer you need to run on your netflow to have such an issue with it?

The issue with this software-based router won't be NetFlow; it'll be throughput, as you indicated, along with resiliency to attack.

The day of public-facing software-based routers is really over, from an availability perspective.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins [at] arbor> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

fweimer at bfk

Nov 17, 2009, 11:21 PM

Post #8 of 27 (1497 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

* Kris Amy:

> My requirements are fairly simple.
>
> 2-3 full BGP tables
> 120-300 MB of traffic
> Ethernet only
> Netflow with 1:1 sampling

You could easily use a PC for that. 8-/

> The both the J and the SRX have gone to 100% cpu with 20meg of traffic and
> 1:1 netflow.

We saw that as well, but when we got rid of stateful filters, things
improved. What worries me a bit is that there is no configurable
limit for the maximum flow count on J-series devices, so I wonder if a
high rate of flow creation would cause the sampled process to use up
all available memory.

--
Florian Weimer <fweimer [at] bfk>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

illcritikz at gmail

Nov 17, 2009, 11:38 PM

Post #9 of 27 (1486 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

While I agree with your comment I don't feel it is entirely true, neither us
know where this router is to be placed on the network or its full duties, we
just know it needs enough memory for a couple of full tables and can do up
to 300Mb/s with non-sampled netflow via ethernet interfaces.

Even as a public facing CE, consider the 3 BGP feeds to be 3 100Mb
connections to 3 different ISP's, each delivered via a 100Mb circuit, any
attack > 100Mbs is going to be dropped(tail-drop/rate-limit whatever method
the ISP implements) before it even makes it to the poor software-based
router and given the almost 300Mbs @ 64-byte spec I don't think it would
have a problem with it, usual CoPP applying.

Having said that I don't contest if money isn't so much an issue that a
hardware based solution is always going to be the better option if it
provides the feature set you require, but remember not everyone runs @
line-rate :)

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins [at] arbor> wrote:

>
> On Nov 18, 2009, at 1:14 PM, Ben Steele wrote:
>
> > I can't see it having a problem with non-sampled netflow but if you are
> really worried about that
> > just ask your local SE when you purchase, is there a specific timer you
> need to run on your netflow to have such an issue with it?
>
> The issue with this software-based router won't be NetFlow; it'll be
> throughput, as you indicated, along with resiliency to attack.
>
> The day of public-facing software-based routers is really over, from an
> availability perspective.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Roland Dobbins <rdobbins [at] arbor> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
>
> Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.
>
> -- H.L. Mencken
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

rdobbins at arbor

Nov 17, 2009, 11:40 PM

Post #10 of 27 (1491 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Nov 18, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Ben Steele wrote:

> any attack > 100Mbs is going to be dropped(tail-drop/rate-limit whatever method the ISP implements) before it even makes it to the poor software-based router and given the almost 300Mbs @ 64-byte spec I don't think it would have a problem with it, usual CoPP applying.

You're assuming the attack is 'inbound' - often, this isn't the case.

;>

I've also seen software-based routers absolutely crushed by the sheer number of flows engendered by DNS amplification attacks, when an open recursor is soutbhound of said software-based router and the miscreants are bouncing an attack through it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins [at] arbor> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

illcritikz at gmail

Nov 17, 2009, 11:49 PM

Post #11 of 27 (1486 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

Ok fair point, locally originated attacks are bad no matter you have some
times.

I'll stop hijacking this thread and let the OP get on with their choice :)

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins [at] arbor> wrote:

>
> On Nov 18, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Ben Steele wrote:
>
> > any attack > 100Mbs is going to be dropped(tail-drop/rate-limit whatever
> method the ISP implements) before it even makes it to the poor
> software-based router and given the almost 300Mbs @ 64-byte spec I don't
> think it would have a problem with it, usual CoPP applying.
>
> You're assuming the attack is 'inbound' - often, this isn't the case.
>
> ;>
>
> I've also seen software-based routers absolutely crushed by the sheer
> number of flows engendered by DNS amplification attacks, when an open
> recursor is soutbhound of said software-based router and the miscreants are
> bouncing an attack through it.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Roland Dobbins <rdobbins [at] arbor> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
>
> Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.
>
> -- H.L. Mencken
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

fweimer at bfk

Nov 17, 2009, 11:58 PM

Post #12 of 27 (1488 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

* Roland Dobbins:

> The issue with this software-based router won't be NetFlow; it'll be
> throughput, as you indicated, along with resiliency to attack.

Not really, forwarding 200 to 300 Mbps of attack traffic (or more) is
not a problem anymore.

> The day of public-facing software-based routers is really over, from
> an availability perspective.

That's like saying that the day of links with less than 10 Gbps of
capacity are over, from an availability perspective.

And if your router fails to forward an outbound DoS attack, that's
actually a good thing, isn't it? In most scenarios, it's also fairly
easy to restrict its impact to a single customer. Curiously, that's a
point where flow-based fowarding is superior to stateless forwarding.

--
Florian Weimer <fweimer [at] bfk>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

mtinka at globaltransit

Nov 18, 2009, 12:01 AM

Post #13 of 27 (1487 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
wrote:

> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
> The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
> your supplier should be competitively priced with an
> ASR1002.

This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.

We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
lovely.

The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.

Cheers,

Mark.

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.82 KB)

rdobbins at arbor

Nov 18, 2009, 12:10 AM

Post #14 of 27 (1484 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Nov 18, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:

> Not really, forwarding 200 to 300 Mbps of attack traffic (or more) is
> not a problem anymore.

My experience differs, and has for quite some time. It's really the pps and flows which are the killer.

> That's like saying that the day of links with less than 10 Gbps of capacity are over, from an availability perspective.

Straw-man, you know better than that, heh.

> And if your router fails to forward an outbound DoS attack, that's
> actually a good thing, isn't it?

Actually, the preferred outcome is that you can block it on the router with S/RTBH or an ACL or whatever, and the router stays up forwarding the non-attack traffic.

;>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins [at] arbor> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

rdobbins at arbor

Nov 18, 2009, 12:15 AM

Post #15 of 27 (1489 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Nov 18, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:

> The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this space, anymore.

These boxes were eating Cisco's lunch in this space for quite some time, until Cisco finally came out with the ASR as a reaction to the Mxi boxes. It's probably just about Juniper's time to leapfrog again, and then of course it will be Cisco's again, and so forth . . .

;>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins [at] arbor> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Kris at amy

Nov 18, 2009, 2:48 AM

Post #16 of 27 (1482 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

The plot thickens,

With sampling set to 1/100. The box is nominally at 50%.

However whenever we commit a config the box jumps to 100% cpu for approx 10
minutes. We started seeing this when I brought up 1 full bgp peer. My
Partner has an open case with JTAC for this and will let you know the
results when they come to hand.

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 6:01 PM, "Mark Tinka" <mtinka [at] globaltransit> wrote:

> On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
> wrote:
>
>> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
>> The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
>> your supplier should be competitively priced with an
>> ASR1002.
>
> This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
> M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
> offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
> STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
> 20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
> line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.
>
> We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
> M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
> medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
> since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
> lovely.
>
> The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
> space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

mtinka at globaltransit

Nov 18, 2009, 2:55 AM

Post #17 of 27 (1475 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Wednesday 18 November 2009 06:48:17 pm Kris Amy wrote:

> The plot thickens,
>
> With sampling set to 1/100. The box is nominally at 50%.
>
> However whenever we commit a config the box jumps to 100%
> cpu for approx 10 minutes. We started seeing this when I
> brought up 1 full bgp peer. My Partner has an open case
> with JTAC for this and will let you know the results when
> they come to hand.

Which box is this?

We've seen similar behaviour on an M7i/M10i running any
version of JUNOS post 9.x.

Feedback from JTAC was that if an MS-PIC is not installed,
recommend sampling rate be 1/1000. CFEB CPU seems to idle at
about 8% following that.

Cheers,

Mark.

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.82 KB)

Kris at amy

Nov 18, 2009, 3:38 AM

Post #18 of 27 (1484 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

This is an SRX240H running 10.0

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 8:55 PM, "Mark Tinka" <mtinka [at] globaltransit> wrote:

> On Wednesday 18 November 2009 06:48:17 pm Kris Amy wrote:
>
>> The plot thickens,
>>
>> With sampling set to 1/100. The box is nominally at 50%.
>>
>> However whenever we commit a config the box jumps to 100%
>> cpu for approx 10 minutes. We started seeing this when I
>> brought up 1 full bgp peer. My Partner has an open case
>> with JTAC for this and will let you know the results when
>> they come to hand.
>
> Which box is this?
>
> We've seen similar behaviour on an M7i/M10i running any
> version of JUNOS post 9.x.
>
> Feedback from JTAC was that if an MS-PIC is not installed,
> recommend sampling rate be 1/1000. CFEB CPU seems to idle at
> about 8% following that.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Keegan.Holley at sungard

Nov 18, 2009, 4:29 AM

Post #19 of 27 (1482 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

I think it depends on the application. For example the Juniper still has
higher port density via support for more multiport SONET interfaces. Also,
I could be wrong but I don't believe the ASR 1002 supports 10G. I think
the ASR1002 is made for an application that people usually choose cisco
for. It's the not-so medium sized enterprise core or for cpe termination
for SONET. As you start comparing the larger ASR series routers to the
other M-series I think Juniper still has the advantage for NSP
applications. Also, most of the time the price is negotiable if you
mention that you are thinking of going with the cisco. I haven't done
much comparison shopping with the ASR's though. I think the 7206VXR still
does the job and is much cheaper than both the M7i and the ASR1002.

From:
Mark Tinka <mtinka [at] globaltransit>
To:
juniper-nsp [at] puck
Date:
11/18/2009 03:13 AM
Subject:
Re: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
Sent by:
<juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck>

On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
wrote:

> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
> The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
> your supplier should be competitively priced with an
> ASR1002.

This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.

We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
lovely.

The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.

Cheers,

Mark.
[attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Keegan Holley/SAS/SunGard]
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

ntwrkguru at gmail

Nov 18, 2009, 6:04 AM

Post #20 of 27 (1483 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Mark Tinka <mtinka [at] globaltransit>wrote:

> On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
> wrote:
>
> > I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
> > The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
> > your supplier should be competitively priced with an
> > ASR1002.
>
> This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
> M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
> offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
> STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
> 20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
> line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.
>

The trend is more and more towards Ethernet. Why would one need/want to
dump an STM64 into an M7i or equivalent Cisco? If one were to need a large
pipe filtering device (which I assume is what you are eluding to), I would
assume that Juniper's response will be (will, as in future) an SRX with
10GE/STM64 SFP+/XFP optics.

My point is that the M7i/M10i are old and while they still have a play in
certain applications, there are newer boxes better suited to high
throughput, processor intensive tasks.

Back to the OP, I would never bring up a software-based router in such a
scenario as you described.

>
> We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
> M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
> medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
> since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
> lovely.
>
> The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
> space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

BBlackford at nwresd

Nov 18, 2009, 8:57 AM

Post #21 of 27 (1478 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

Even with an NPE-G2, the 7206VXR is a software router and falls over at about 200k PPS (YMMV). The M7i and ASR1k are true line rate hardware routers and can do several million PPS before showing performance degradation. I would compare the 7206VXR to a J6350.

-b

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Keegan.Holley [at] sungard
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:29 AM
To: mtinka [at] globaltransit
Cc: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck; juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive

I think it depends on the application. For example the Juniper still has
higher port density via support for more multiport SONET interfaces. Also,
I could be wrong but I don't believe the ASR 1002 supports 10G. I think
the ASR1002 is made for an application that people usually choose cisco
for. It's the not-so medium sized enterprise core or for cpe termination
for SONET. As you start comparing the larger ASR series routers to the
other M-series I think Juniper still has the advantage for NSP
applications. Also, most of the time the price is negotiable if you
mention that you are thinking of going with the cisco. I haven't done
much comparison shopping with the ASR's though. I think the 7206VXR still
does the job and is much cheaper than both the M7i and the ASR1002.

From:
Mark Tinka <mtinka [at] globaltransit>
To:
juniper-nsp [at] puck
Date:
11/18/2009 03:13 AM
Subject:
Re: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
Sent by:
<juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck>

On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
wrote:

> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
> The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
> your supplier should be competitively priced with an
> ASR1002.

This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.

We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
lovely.

The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.

Cheers,

Mark.
[attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Keegan Holley/SAS/SunGard]
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

dwinkworth at att

Nov 18, 2009, 9:55 AM

Post #22 of 27 (1476 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

Wouldn't an SRX-650 be a better choice if your comparing to an ASR1002?

________________________________
From: Kris Amy <Kris [at] amy>
To: "mtinka [at] globaltransit" <mtinka [at] globaltransit>; "juniper-nsp [at] puck" <juniper-nsp [at] puck>
Sent: Wed, November 18, 2009 4:48:17 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive

The plot thickens,

With sampling set to 1/100. The box is nominally at 50%.

However whenever we commit a config the box jumps to 100% cpu for approx 10
minutes. We started seeing this when I brought up 1 full bgp peer. My
Partner has an open case with JTAC for this and will let you know the
results when they come to hand.

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 6:01 PM, "Mark Tinka" <mtinka [at] globaltransit> wrote:

> On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
> wrote:
>
>> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
>> The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
>> your supplier should be competitively priced with an
>> ASR1002.
>
> This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
> M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
> offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
> STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
> 20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
> line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.
>
> We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
> M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
> medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
> since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
> lovely.
>
> The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
> space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

hoogen82 at gmail

Nov 18, 2009, 11:50 AM

Post #23 of 27 (1479 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

I would assume so...SRX240.. is not an equivalent to ASR1002..

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Derick Winkworth <dwinkworth [at] att>wrote:

> Wouldn't an SRX-650 be a better choice if your comparing to an ASR1002?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kris Amy <Kris [at] amy>
> To: "mtinka [at] globaltransit" <mtinka [at] globaltransit>; "
> juniper-nsp [at] puck" <juniper-nsp [at] puck>
> Sent: Wed, November 18, 2009 4:48:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
>
> The plot thickens,
>
> With sampling set to 1/100. The box is nominally at 50%.
>
> However whenever we commit a config the box jumps to 100% cpu for approx 10
> minutes. We started seeing this when I brought up 1 full bgp peer. My
> Partner has an open case with JTAC for this and will let you know the
> results when they come to hand.
>
> Regards,
> Kris
>
>
> On 18/11/09 6:01 PM, "Mark Tinka" <mtinka [at] globaltransit> wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:58:53 am Bill Blackford
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison.
> >> The performance numbers are almost exact and depending on
> >> your supplier should be competitively priced with an
> >> ASR1002.
> >
> > This is where/when I think Juniper need to re-invent the
> > M7i/M10i. Even with the new Enhanced CFEB, the ASR1000's
> > offer way more value, e.g., they can talk 10Gbps Ethernet or
> > STM-64/OC-192, they can talk STM-16/OC-48, now support a
> > 20Gbps centralized forwarding plane, support a wide range of
> > line rate Gig-E line cards, e.t.c.
> >
> > We've seen a number of cases where the ASR1004/6 beats an
> > M10i any day, especially when used as a small core or
> > medium-sized edge router. The M7i is in even worse trouble
> > since the ASR1002 comes with 4x on-board Gig-E ports -
> > lovely.
> >
> > The M7i's/M10i's are finding it very hard to play in this
> > space, anymore. This needs to be rectified.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Mark.
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

travers at tjsnetworkconsulting

Nov 18, 2009, 1:10 PM

Post #24 of 27 (1473 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

I have a couple of j2320's with 2gb of ram running 2 feeds + few peering
feeds pushing 80-120Mb of traffic with 1:1 netflow. Cpu sometimes hits
70%

I think it really depends on your traffic mix

Travers

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
[mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Kris Amy
Sent: Wednesday, 18 November 2009 4:42 PM
To: Tommy Perniciaro; juniper-nsp [at] puck
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive

I have briefly tested a j2320 before going to an SRX240.

The both the J and the SRX have gone to 100% cpu with 20meg of traffic
and
1:1 netflow.

Regards,
Kris

On 18/11/09 2:58 PM, "Tommy Perniciaro" <TPerniciaro [at] accuvant>
wrote:

> Have you checked out the j6350?
>
> It's not apples to apples but none of the juniper line really lines up
> with asr1000's
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 17, 2009, at 8:49 PM, "Kris Amy" <Kris [at] amy> wrote:
>
>>> From the pricing I have received it seems the M7i is quite a bit
>>> more.
>>
>> An ASR1002-F (which is all we really need) is approx $16k.
>> An M7i is $30k.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kris
>>
>>
>> On 18/11/09 1:58 PM, "Bill Blackford" <BBlackford [at] nwresd>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe the M7i is the closest one 2 one comparison. The
>>> performance numbers
>>> are almost exact and depending on your supplier should be
>>> competitively priced
>>> with an ASR1002.
>>>
>>> J-care on it seems higher than smartnet if you can believe that.
>>>
>>> -b
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck
>>> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Kris Amy
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:59 PM
>>> To: juniper-nsp [at] puck
>>> Subject: [j-nsp] ASR1002 Comparitive
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I'm just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?
>>>
>>> It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit
>>> more
>>> expensive.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kris
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.707 / Virus Database: 270.14.72/2511 - Release Date:
11/18/09 18:50:00
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

juniperdude at gmail

Nov 18, 2009, 5:09 PM

Post #25 of 27 (1473 views)
Permalink

Re: ASR1002 Comparitive [In reply to]

Hi,

We actually just completed an RFP for:

2-3 eBGP peers (full routes)
smattering of iBGP
30k+ routes internal in OSPF

Cisco pitched an ASR 1002.
Juniper Pitched an SRX650.

We went with the SRX650 - Better throughput and about 1/2 the price of the Cisco box.

Regards,

- Chris.

On 2009-11-17, at 6:59 PM, Kris Amy wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I’m just wondering what the J equivalent of a ASR1002 is?
>
> It seems an SRX240 is way under powered and an M7i quite a fair bit more expensive.
>
> Regards,
> Kris
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads