On 4 May 2017 at 23:39, c b <bz_siege_01@hotmail.com> wrote:
* Affordable. I know that's subjective, but we need a solution that is as close as possible to commodity-pricing if this modernization effort balloons to include all of our data centers.
How many? For any non-trivial volume devices with equal ports and features tend to cost the same from every vendor. Unfortunately your density requirements are very modest. Also are you sure you are as price sensitive as you think you are? I.e. maybe not look just your BU's budget, but impact on bottom line. Since saving here some, may end up costing in OPEX significantly more over time, and that case may be easier to make than you think. Usually router/switch CAPEX isn't even a blip in enterprises bottom line. But you probably should review at least: - Juniper MX204, MX480 - Cisco ASR9k - Huawei NE20, NE40 - Alcatel 7750SR Personally I'm bit worried about Cisco's transition to newish OS and new linecard architecture. Might come out good, might have some rearing issues. Alcatel is expensive to automate, as you cannot ship it new full config and have it roll-forward to it from old config. I am also worried that they are essentially developing their own booting OS, instead of developing routing suite on existing OS, I'm not sure if that is good investment of engineering hours, and if that's reason why they're stuck in PowerPC, while others rock XEON. However Alcatel's SMP capability is probably currently best of the bunch. All of the stated options are NPU/run-to-completion boxes which have higher port-price and better features than pipeline boxes. However pipeline boxes are far denser and cheaper per port, but from your POV they'll be even more expensive as your density requirement is so modest. You have no stated features which couldn't be met by their pipeline portfolios, so if you had the scale, pipeline box, like PTX1k or any of the BRCM Jericho boxes might be more interesting to you. -- ++ytti