I have a client looking to implement x86 based route reflectors, and was looking at the ax1000. I'm wondering if anyone has implemented it yet, and what your experience has been? Any other alternatives would also be appreciated. This customer does standard L3 VPNs, and VPLS services so the software has to support that. Thanks!
On 5/Feb/15 22:41, David Bass wrote:
I have a client looking to implement x86 based route reflectors, and was looking at the ax1000. I'm wondering if anyone has implemented it yet, and what your experience has been?
Any other alternatives would also be appreciated. This customer does standard L3 VPNs, and VPLS services so the software has to support that.
I have spoken about our success in using Cisco's CSR1000v on ESXi on x86_64 hardware previously on this list. Yes, the licenses will cost you (both VMware and CSR1000v). KVM is supported, but I haven't tried it. Suffice it to say, Cisco seem to be putting most of their energy into ESXi. Mark.
We have the CSR1000v on KVM with the premium 10mbps license as a RR it is works perfectly. We did have to play about with the nic drivers and found that the e1000 seems to be the most stable. N Nick Ryce Network Architect, Fluency Communications Ltd T: +44 (0)845 874 7000 www.fluency.net.uk <http://www.fluency.net.uk/> nick@fluency.net.uk On 07/02/2015 08:18, "Mark Tinka" <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
On 5/Feb/15 22:41, David Bass wrote:
I have a client looking to implement x86 based route reflectors, and was looking at the ax1000. I'm wondering if anyone has implemented it yet, and what your experience has been?
Any other alternatives would also be appreciated. This customer does standard L3 VPNs, and VPLS services so the software has to support that.
I have spoken about our success in using Cisco's CSR1000v on ESXi on x86_64 hardware previously on this list.
Yes, the licenses will cost you (both VMware and CSR1000v). KVM is supported, but I haven't tried it. Suffice it to say, Cisco seem to be putting most of their energy into ESXi.
Mark.
On 7/Feb/15 15:28, Nick Ryce wrote:
We have the CSR1000v on KVM with the premium 10mbps license as a RR it is works perfectly. We did have to play about with the nic drivers and found that the e1000 seems to be the most stable.
That's great to hear. We deployed on VMware ESXi with a Premium license for 8GB RAM (which gives you 500Mbps, not that you need it). The installation wasn't problematic, just don't live by Cisco's instructions re: the VM - not very useful :-). Mark.
I've been testing various vRR solutions recently but haven't taken a long look at Metaswitch, but I may contact them. On paper, their RR doesn't support all the AFI/SAFI combinations I require. There are a few commercial options which have come to market very recently namely: ALU VSR Juniper vMX (vRR version) Cisco XRv (IOS-XR) Cisco CSR1000v (IOS-XE) I can't give exact numbers, but all of them are much faster on pretty basic newish Xeon hardware than a Cisco ASR9K/Juniper MX with the latest and greatest RP, while using almost no CPU really. They don't need much RAM either, 8-16GB is more than enough. XRv and the CSR1000v will run under ESX fine, and are packaged/documented to deploy that way. vMX/VSR will but it's not really a supported/documented thing yet, they are currently supported running under Qemu/KVM. One issue with VSR/xRV under ESX right now is they have no "display" drivers/output, so you have to use a virtual serial port which is only supported with the Enterprise+ version of ESX for some inane reason. XRv is 32-bit for now, the others are all 64-bit. CSR1000v has definitey been around the longest. XRv, vMX, and VSR all get built the same time as the router software now so they get features when the router software does. You will find more features in them than the CSR1000v and new service provider features will be in XR before XE. For instance Cisco has something called Optimized Route Reflection where a vRR will simulate the IGP network rooted at each client and send the best BGP paths specific to each client. It means you can have a centralized RR without running into the issue of it selecting paths based on its position in the network vs. the client. That's a beta XRv thing but I don't know if you'll ever see it in XE. All of them support pretty much every major AFI/SAFI. Pricing wise the CSR1000v is going to easily be the cheapest option. Phil On 2/5/15, 20:41, "David Bass" <davidbass570@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a client looking to implement x86 based route reflectors, and was looking at the ax1000. I'm wondering if anyone has implemented it yet, and what your experience has been?
Any other alternatives would also be appreciated. This customer does standard L3 VPNs, and VPLS services so the software has to support that.
Thanks!
On 7/Feb/15 21:55, Phil Bedard wrote:
CSR1000v has definitey been around the longest. XRv, vMX, and VSR all get built the same time as the router software now so they get features when the router software does.
Junos 14.2R2 just released a few days ago, which officially brings vMX to the market. That said, pricing is not yet (officially) available, but one can get code to test from your SE in the interim.
You will find more features in them than the CSR1000v and new service provider features will be in XR before XE. For instance Cisco has something called Optimized Route Reflection where a vRR will simulate the IGP network rooted at each client and send the best BGP paths specific to each client. It means you can have a centralized RR without running into the issue of it selecting paths based on its position in the network vs. the client. That's a beta XRv thing but I don't know if you'll ever see it in XE.
This was one of the reasons shifting the RR functionality to a VM on x86 hardware compelled us to go this route. Much cheaper and more sustainable to deploy a box at site to avoid this issue until the tech. (BGP-ORR) becomes more widely available from the community/vendors. I believe it's being worked on under: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-08 Cheers, Mark.
I can¹t speak for this product specifically as we do not use it, but on metaswitch voice platforms there support is impecable. Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / carlos@race.com / http://www.race.com <http://www.race.com/> On 2/5/15, 12:41 PM, "David Bass" <davidbass570@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a client looking to implement x86 based route reflectors, and was looking at the ax1000. I'm wondering if anyone has implemented it yet, and what your experience has been?
Any other alternatives would also be appreciated. This customer does standard L3 VPNs, and VPLS services so the software has to support that.
Thanks!
participants (5)
-
Carlos Alcantar -
David Bass -
Mark Tinka -
Nick Ryce -
Phil Bedard