On 7/Jun/20 00:07, Bryton Herdes wrote:

However many less horror stories than any of the lower-ends in the ACX line... i.e. 1100..

Juniper are meant to be pushing out the ACX710 which is meant to be better with Broadcom's latest chip sets. I, generally, don't have much faith in merchant silicon on high-touch edge routers. Maybe for peering and such, but even then, one would be pulling (my) teeth. I just feel that vendors can't reliably compete on merchant silicon because despite software superiority that may set them apart, the chip set is the chip set. If one vendor doesn't have it, they probably all don't have it. So then it boils down to badge-buying, in which case why pay the premium for a Cisco or Juniper or Nokia badge when I can pay far less for a new kid on the block using the same chip set? Fair point, the new kid probably has the least mature software, but then again, if you are going to save tons of cash on not paying for a premium badge, in order to get the same chip set, it might make sense to take a bit of pain and help the new kid grow up, as your bank accounts bleeds less profusely. Mark.

On 8/Jun/20 04:34, Brian Johnson wrote:

I’ve seen horror stories for almost every platform from every vendor over my time. It usually is caused from using the wrong device for the wrong purpose.

If you know its limitations, and use it with in the bounds of its capabilities, you will have very few issues with the ACX5448.

For Layer 2 switching, I have no problems with Broadcom at all. Works a treat, and we are super happy with our Arista switch deployments for this. That said, we did run into Jericho issues with egress policing, where the chip runs out of TCAM based on the default EOS profiles. That had to be fixed and tweaked. Thankfully, we don't need large IP ACL's on a switching platform. Mark.