[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mx204 alternative
- Subject: Mx204 alternative
- From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 00:01:03 +0200
- In-reply-to: <CAPkb-7CtjvdhU=UrKBstDsM2zCGnxrsYzne4YT3v0DAqXYYPCw@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CA+LTh5UUbV7YNFZOh0b88-4H46VvtksVgTyRRKttmqX0__cDSw@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAPkb-7CgG+jOTPEuc7Vhrn-4fz_YeNPr+Yzk3aoapCNz+VqQOw@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAPkb-7CtjvdhU=UrKBstDsM2zCGnxrsYzne4YT3v0DAqXYYPCw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/Sep/19 14:52, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
>
> Maturity is such a subjective word.
As service provider operations go, maturity.
> But yes there are plenty of options for routing protocols on a Linux.
> Every internet exchange is running BGP on Linux for the route server
> after all.
Not quite the same thing, but I take your point.
>
> I am not recommending a server over MX204. I think MX204 is brilliant.
> It is one of the cheapest options and if that is not cheap enough,
> THEN the server solution is probably what you may be looking for.Â
>
> You can move a lot of traffic even with an old leftover server.
> Especially if you are not concerned with moving 64 bytes DDoS at line
> speed, because likely you would be down anyway in that case.
>
> As to the OPEX I would claim there are small shops that would have an
> easier time with a server, because they know how to do that. They
> would have only one or two routers and learning how to run JUNOS just
> for that might never happen. It all depends on what workforce you
> have. Network people or server guys?
That's what Saku was alluding to earlier - opex is not just in the hardware.
Mark.