These are being implemented in production on many a bank network...so yes, they are plenty good enough. You will obviously need to test them in a lab to make sure the features you need to implement don't have any bugs that need to be addressed first. Overall I've had good experiences with them though in a spine/leaf topology in major data centers. I've also been implementing Arista switches as core devices outside of the data center with some pretty great results, but you need to be careful to make sure the features you need are available on the platform you want to buy. As with Cisco (and any other vendor) there are some hardware limitations where some features will exist on one platform, but not another. On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:39 AM, H I Baysal <hibaysal@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
Hardware is really nice. Backplane, buffers, just basically “pumping” bandwidth. It’s really good.
However, mlag can show some bugs when having only 1 interface in an MLAG (only 1 side) they had issues with the ifindex numbering in software. There were OSPF configuration options missing, etc.
In short, hardware is really nice, software needs more maturing. Nice for distribution but not for core.
On 24 Nov 2015, at 19:02, David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
Curious if anyone's used the 7280 and wants to share their experience? I'm looking at it primarily for three reasons, MLAG (i.e. multi-chassis LACP), large ARP/MAC table (256k entries) and large IPv6 neighbor table (256k entries). For the table sizes we would like out of one pair of switches, we'd be into the Cisco 7000 series, but that's dramatically more expensive and we don't need much of anything else that it offers.
Looked at Brocade too, but they don't have devices that can do the multi chassis LACP, has the huge table sizes and has a reasonable number of 10gig ports. It was possible to construct a workable solution using VDX's for switching and CER's for routing, but that's more complex than Arista's option if it's a usable option.
Thanks,
David