So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....) So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives? Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series -Romeo
For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100% yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor. I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple full table feeds without any issue. On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com
wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was hoping for better experience reports since last mention. To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 3-8 full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito whitebox/ open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks? /kc On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100% yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple full table feeds without any issue.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com
wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
-- Ken Chase - math@sizone.org Guelph Canada
On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ken Chase <math@sizone.org> wrote:
Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was hoping for better experience reports since last mention.
To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 3-8 full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito whitebox/ open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?
The 7280 is likely what you’re looking at. Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G range or so. I for one use Arista for Layer3 for FTTH purposes as it gives me good software/hardware support for my features. - Jared
Thx. Rather steer clear of microtik for now however. Guess I shoulda mentioned a baseline 10G capability at least on 4 sfp+ ports (I know there's some 2port Microtiks too). Everyone's got gig-to-the-home now, I can't see how anyone plans 1G PE builds anymore. They'll be obsolete by the time they're plugged in (10G for any medium sized op is almost obsolete already.) /kc On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:32:14PM -0500, Jared Mauch said:
On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ken Chase <math@sizone.org> wrote:
Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was hoping for better experience reports since last mention.
To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 3-8 full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito whitebox/ open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?
The 7280 is likely what you???re looking at. Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G range or so.
I for one use Arista for Layer3 for FTTH purposes as it gives me good software/hardware support for my features.
- Jared
Jared Mauch wrote:
Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G range or so.
mikrotik support for ipv6 is still dodgy: recursive next-hop is not supported in bgp/ipv6: https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=123964#p610239 ... and OSPFv3 routes with the local-address flag set are dropped: https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=51124#p319794 Between the two of these feature deficits, ipv6 isn't a runner on this platform in a SP environment. Both problems are due to be resolved in routeros v7, but the release date for this is elusive. Also, the bgp stack is single-threaded and the individual core speeds are relatively low, so operating these devices in the ipv4 dfz can be troublesome. Nick
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:38:53PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Jared Mauch wrote:
Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G range or so.
mikrotik support for ipv6 is still dodgy: recursive next-hop is not supported in bgp/ipv6:
https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=123964#p610239
... and OSPFv3 routes with the local-address flag set are dropped:
https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=51124#p319794
Between the two of these feature deficits, ipv6 isn't a runner on this platform in a SP environment. Both problems are due to be resolved in routeros v7, but the release date for this is elusive.
Also, the bgp stack is single-threaded and the individual core speeds are relatively low, so operating these devices in the ipv4 dfz can be troublesome.
And still no support for BGP Large Communities! :( http://largebgpcommunities.net/implementations/ Kind regards, Job
Jared, Which Arista box do you use for FTTH features? Whats the cost like as FTTH boxes are usually inexpensive, and Arista is not know to be inexpensive compared to something like Calix or Adtran. On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ken Chase <math@sizone.org> wrote:
Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was hoping for better experience reports since last mention.
To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 3-8 full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito whitebox/ open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?
The 7280 is likely what you’re looking at. Lots of folks also use MikroTik as well if the traffic is in the 1G range or so.
I for one use Arista for Layer3 for FTTH purposes as it gives me good software/hardware support for my features.
- Jared
On Nov 30, 2017, at 11:56 PM, Colton Conor <colton.conor@gmail.com> wrote:
Jared,
Which Arista box do you use for FTTH features? Whats the cost like as FTTH boxes are usually inexpensive, and Arista is not know to be inexpensive compared to something like Calix or Adtran.
I use the DCS-7050S-52-F. This is because I get good routed features to meet my use-case, and the cost per SFP port was right. I’m purchasing them used, so my price per 1G port (that can also do 10G to uplink/infrastructure) is comparable to the per-port price of other BCM based SFP switches, and the software quality is much much higher. I don’t need 10’s of these either, so my use case is perhaps unique. I really need some basic routing support, DHCP relay w/ circuit id, etc. Ping me offline if you want more details about my use-case. Once I have a few more things sorted, expect a full nanog talk about my problem & solution. - Jared
On 11/30/17 11:17, Ken Chase wrote:
Back to this discussion! :) Arista as a viable full-table PE router. Was hoping for better experience reports since last mention.
To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 3-8 full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U? Or we're ito whitebox/ open routers still for that (bird/openbgp?) or microtiks?
Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box. Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer. control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz. We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions. the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.
/kc
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100% yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple full table feeds without any issue.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com
wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box.??
Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer. control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz. We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions.
the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.
Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick Bird in this case? /kc
/kc
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100% yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple full table feeds without any issue.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com
wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
Ken Chase wrote:
Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick Bird in this case?
this is a 7280SR pushing ~130G-140G of traffic in/out with about 75% of the ports lit:
Router#show env power Power Input Output Output Supply Model Capacity Current Current Power Status ------- -------------------- --------- -------- -------- -------- ------------- 1 PWR-500AC-F 500W 0.37A 5.89A 70.6W Ok 2 PWR-500AC-F 500W 0.39A 6.30A 75.6W Ok Total -- 1000W -- -- 146.2W -- Router#
Also:
To make the Q bit more general, are there any PE routers yet that can handle 3-8 full feeds and use an amp and 1U or so instead of 5 and 4U?
juniper claims that the mx204 has a typical power draw of ~250W. Nick
Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box.??
Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer. control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz. We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions.
the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics.
Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick Bird in this case?
On 11/30/17 13:00, Ken Chase wrote: this a standard sr that's moderately busy but not exactly slammed, I'm be impressed if you could triple that at full tilt. #show environment power Power Input Output Output Supply Model Capacity Current Current Power Status ------- -------------------- --------- -------- -------- -------- ------------- 1 PWR-500AC-R 500W 0.35A 5.27A 62.8W Ok 2 PWR-500AC-R 500W 0.32A 4.81A 56.4W Ok Total -- 1000W -- -- 119.1W -- bird had memory footprint going with it as well as some local modification and we hacked addpath into it a few years ago. filtering poilcy is something we programmatically generate and interact with via agents so a traditional style monolithic config isn't that useful.
/kc
/kc
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said:
For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100% yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor.
I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple full table feeds without any issue.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com
wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
Hello, What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and another IXP feed? Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no more ports left. The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports. Will it run smoothly with BGP, PIM, IPV6? Thanks. -- Dmitry Sherman Interhost Networks Ltd Dmitry@interhost.net Mobile: +972-54-3181182 Office: +972-74-7029881 Web: www.interhost.co.il On 01/12/2017, 1:17, "NANOG on behalf of joel jaeggli" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of joelja@bogus.com> wrote: On 11/30/17 13:00, Ken Chase wrote: > >Arista DCS-7280SRA-48C6 is a 1ru box.?? > > > >Has a nominally million route fib, Jericho+ 8GB of packet buffer. > >control-plane is 8GB of ram andAMD GX-424CC SOC which is 4 core 2.4ghz. > >We do direct fib injection with bird rather than the arista bgpd but the > >control-plane is capable of managing quite a few bgp sessions. > > > >the 1/2ru 7280CR2K-30 and 60 are 2m route fib boxes with still heftier > >control planes but they're a different class of box being all 100G and > >requiring multi-chip/internal fabrics. > > Sounds pretty good - hows your power draw on that thing? Why'd you pick Bird > in this case? this a standard sr that's moderately busy but not exactly slammed, I'm be impressed if you could triple that at full tilt. #show environment power Power Input Output Output Supply Model Capacity Current Current Power Status ------- -------------------- --------- -------- -------- -------- ------------- 1 PWR-500AC-R 500W 0.35A 5.27A 62.8W Ok 2 PWR-500AC-R 500W 0.32A 4.81A 56.4W Ok Total -- 1000W -- -- 119.1W -- bird had memory footprint going with it as well as some local modification and we hacked addpath into it a few years ago. filtering poilcy is something we programmatically generate and interact with via agents so a traditional style monolithic config isn't that useful. > /kc > > > >> /kc > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:45:09AM -0800, Tyler Conrad said: > >> >For Enterprise/DC, it works great. For service provider, they're not 100% > >> >yet. The main issue is going to be around VRFs, as there's no interaction > >> >between them (at least in the code version I'm on, that may have changed > >> >recently or be changing soon). They'll work great as a P-Router, but if you > >> >need a PE with route leaking I'd look at another vendor. > >> > > >> >I use a couple pairs of 7280SRs as edge routers/border leaves. Multiple > >> >full table feeds without any issue. > >> > > >> >On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com > >> >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty > >> >> happy with them. > >> >> Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been > >> >> hearing some negative feedback. > >> >> The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. > >> >> (they just heard....) > >> >> > >> >> So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives > >> >> or positives? > >> >> > >> >> Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP > >> >> Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) > >> >> 7050 Series > >> >> 7280 Series > >> >> > >> >> -Romeo > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > > This mail was received via Interhost Mail-SeCure System.
Those devices are awesome, I use those on the same usecase, and recommend them (I do not run pim, tho) On 03/05/2019 07:17 PM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:
Hello, What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and another IXP feed? Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no more ports left. The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports. Will it run smoothly with BGP, PIM, IPV6? Thanks.
Hey Dmitry,
What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and another IXP feed? Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no more ports left. The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports.
You should compare 7280SR against NCS5500 and PTX1k, not ASR and MX. ANET is great company, with great people, but they are like 2 years old in SP market and this is quite visible. It is impressive though what they've done in so little time. -- ++ytti
On 3/5/19, 2:28 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Saku Ytti" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of saku@ytti.fi> wrote: Hey Dmitry, > What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and another IXP feed? > Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no more ports left. > The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports. You should compare 7280SR against NCS5500 and PTX1k, not ASR and MX. ANET is great company, with great people, but they are like 2 years old in SP market and this is quite visible. It is impressive though what they've done in so little time. -- ++ytti I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale. My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE. 5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal.. David
Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale. My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE. 5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..
David
We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista announced the full table BGP routing. Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity. When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they added MSS clamping at the end of last year. The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes. On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM <nanog@jack.fr.eu.org> wrote:
Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G
I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into
On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote: the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale. My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE. 5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..
David
It would be worth your time to look at Extreme SLX9640 with advanced routing license. On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:47 PM Roel Parijs <roel.parijs@gmail.com> wrote:
We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista announced the full table BGP routing. Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.
When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they added MSS clamping at the end of last year.
The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM <nanog@jack.fr.eu.org> wrote:
Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G
I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale. My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE. 5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if
On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote: that's the goal..
David
How much do these boxes cost? On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:24 PM Kaiser, Erich <erich@gotfusion.net> wrote:
It would be worth your time to look at Extreme SLX9640 with advanced routing license.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:47 PM Roel Parijs <roel.parijs@gmail.com> wrote:
We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista announced the full table BGP routing. Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity.
When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they added MSS clamping at the end of last year.
The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM <nanog@jack.fr.eu.org> wrote:
Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G
I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale. My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE. 5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if
On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote: that's the goal..
David
On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
How much do these boxes cost?
List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports "unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some maintenance/support. Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme discount from that tends to look like. I should hope nobody pays list or anywhere close. -- Brandon Martin
Agreed. On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:16 AM Brandon Martin <lists.nanog@monmotha.net> wrote:
On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
How much do these boxes cost?
List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports "unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some maintenance/support. Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme discount from that tends to look like. I should hope nobody pays list or anywhere close. -- Brandon Martin
So how does the 7280SR-48C6 compare to the SLX9540? They are the same Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product differ in software? On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:58 AM Kaiser, Erich <erich@gotfusion.net> wrote:
Agreed.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:16 AM Brandon Martin <lists.nanog@monmotha.net> wrote:
On 3/6/19 12:36 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
How much do these boxes cost?
List is about $100k in North America for a 9640 with all the ports "unlocked", full hardware kit (PSUs, fans, etc.) and some maintenance/support. Take whatever your standard Brocade/Extreme discount from that tends to look like. I should hope nobody pays list or anywhere close. -- Brandon Martin
On 3/7/19 10:44 PM, Colton Conor wrote:
So how does the 7280SR-48C6 compare to the SLX9540? They are the same Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product differ in software?
I think a 9540 would compare more directly against a Nexus 9k series device. They're targeted more at datacenter switching but have full L3 + MPLS and some features useful for carrier applications as well. -- Brandon Martin
On 3/8/19 5:51 AM, Brandon Martin wrote:
On 3/7/19 10:44 PM, Colton Conor wrote:
So how does the 7280SR-48C6 compare to the SLX9540? They are the same Broadcom chipset right? So the real question, is how does the product differ in software?
I just realized that the 7280SR is an Arista device, not Cisco. Argh...too many similar model numbers. I haven't used Arista much at all really. -- Brandon Martin
On 8/Mar/19 13:18, Brandon Martin wrote:
I haven't used Arista much at all really.
We are currently swapping out our Juniper EX4550's and EX4600's for Arista's 7280SR switches, but this is purely for Layer 2 Ethernet customer aggregation in the data centre. The main issue we are having is getting support for L2PT in the Arista on par with what Juniper and Cisco can do today. So far, some of the critical protocols are trickling into test code, but there is still a little bit of way to go before we get everything we need. At any rate, it seems there are no hardware limitations in getting those protocols implemented, and Arista just need to get more people on to the code to write it all up. So that's a positive, although it is delaying our migration. In the core, been using the 7508E for 100Gbps Layer 2 Ethernet aggregation for over a year now. Apart from some fabric modules that failed in 2 switches at the same time (nothing really major as that is part of network operations), they've been solid. Mark.
Is there any reason to have 2M routes support for next 3 years? -- Dmitry Sherman Interhost Networks Ltd Dmitry@interhost.net<mailto:Dmitry@interhost.net> Mobile: +972-54-3181182 Office: +972-74-7029881 Web: www.interhost.co.il From: NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org> on behalf of Roel Parijs <roel.parijs@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 0:47 To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Arista Layer3 We have been using the 7280SR-48C6 for 2.5 years now. Just after Arista announced the full table BGP routing. Looking at the price / port there is nothing near Arista. We also use Cisco ASR1K and Juniper MX204 but these have far less capacity. When we first started, there were quite a few features missing but over the past 2 year they have really been catching up. I was very happy when they added MSS clamping at the end of last year. The new version 7280R2K should be able to handle 2M routes. On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 9:31 PM <nanog@jack.fr.eu.org<mailto:nanog@jack.fr.eu.org>> wrote: Check out the 7280sr2k, which is actually 24*10G, 24*25G, 6*100G On 03/05/2019 08:55 PM, David Hubbard wrote:
I love the NCS5501, but once Arista gets the 2M-route capacity down into the 48x10g format, I'd jump ship in a heartbeat; currently you have to do a much larger chassis-based device or their 100gig 7280 to have that route scale. My big gripes with the 5501 are that, due to its architecture, if you want to do uRPF, you chop your route scale in half, even on the 5501-SE. 5501 also has no supported configuration where you have both first hop redundancy and physical path redundancy, because you can't do both VRRP (its only redundant first hop option) and BVI's, can't do MC-LAG, can't do vPC, so you need switches in addition to the 5501's if that's the goal..
David
On 3/6/19 3:05 AM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:
Is there any reason to have 2M routes support for next 3 years?
Full IPv4 table + full IPv6 table + multiple VRFs (BGP-VPN, etc.) plus lots of on-net deaggregates could well push you above 1M right now especially if your platform also shares that "1M" FIB space with next-hop L2 information, ARP/ND entries, etc. Bonus points for neeing MPLS info in FIB, too, on MPLS PE routers. IPv4 DFZ alone is rapidly growing to where it'll hit 1M for most viewpoints without FIB compression, though most end networks can probably compress it down a fair bit from that. 2M is the next "logical" FIB scale to target, I guess. I've seen 1.5M boxes, too, though the headline FIB scale is always suspect. You have to look at how other things that sit in TCAM will eat into that scale, whether it has static or dynamic CAM partitions, etc. -- Brandon Martin
Thanks for info! -- Dmitry Sherman Interhost Networks Ltd Dmitry@interhost.net Mobile: +972-54-3181182 Office: +972-74-7029881 Web: www.interhost.co.il On 05/03/2019, 21:26, "Saku Ytti" <saku@ytti.fi> wrote: Hey Dmitry, > What do you think about Arista 7280SR (DCS-7280SR-48C6-M-R) as a BGP peering router with 3 x upstream with full route view in RIB (ipv4 + ipv6) and another IXP feed? > Considering switching from ASR9001 which is doing perfect work but has no more ports left. > The price is very competitive comparing to MX or ASR and this router-switch have 48x10Gig + 6x100GigE ports. You should compare 7280SR against NCS5500 and PTX1k, not ASR and MX. ANET is great company, with great people, but they are like 2 years old in SP market and this is quite visible. It is impressive though what they've done in so little time. -- ++ytti
On 2017-11-30 19:36, Romeo Czumbil wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
I have a whole bunch of 7280SR in production, acting as peering-aggregators to easy be able to scale out PNIs to the CDN/Clouds (where you sometimes needs to add 10G of capacity per PoP per month) They work just fine. Simple PE-functions, a few hundred BGP-peers in each, full tables, as-path filtering (150k lines of config), route-maps and sub-route maps. It is certainly not as flexible and easy to work with as for example a MX-router. But on the other hand you get 1Tbit worth of ports for the same price as a 16x10G MX-card. L3VPN, RSVP-TE which could be major things you need is coming to EOS "soon", february i think. The boxes that is coming out here in Q1 (some even out) with Jericho+ and Jericho2 chipsets should be even better with even more tables that should suffice for quite some time, the 1mil limit on 7280SR can be borderline especially when you mix in L3VPN whenever thats coming. Huawei (ce6870) and Cisco (ncs5500) is also selling the same boxes and rumours on the streets are that Juniper will also release a jericho-based PE-box. Also Juniper has picked up alot of slack recently with the release of MX204, which seems for whats its worth be a really good contender in the "small but modern router" market which has been grossly overlooked by many vendors for quite some time. Not sure where cisco really is with the 9901, which atleast looked really good on the CLUS presentations. -- hugge
Their L3 stuff is as stable as their L2 stuff, in general. MP-BGP and VRFs are a tiny bit bleeding edge/lacking features, however for plain OSPF/BGP, they're great. /Ruairi On 30 November 2017 at 18:36, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com> wrote:
So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....)
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives?
Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series
-Romeo
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Romeo Czumbil <Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com> wrote:
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
or positives? We're using the Arista 7280R with Jericho(+) chips as PE routers. We're happy with them. Stable operation, no serious issues so far. Feature wise they're still behind the traditional vendors. Some limitations which come to mind: - reverse path filtering - prefix lists are limited to 65k entries - unexpected behaviour with route-map community add/delete (it's not possible to add a community which would be delted by a previous term) - VRF/MPLS/VPLS support is very basic - no support for unnumbered interfaces - no BGP flowspec - no BGP large communities - no subinterfaces On the other hand all of the above (except unnumbered interfaces) are already on their 2018 road map. Traditionally they focused on their data center customers. But more and more (big) carriers are pushing Arista for the corresponding features needed by carriers.
While I am personally a fan of mikrotik for their ridiculously inexpensive MPLS features, their total and complete lack of ISIS is a show stopper in a lot of cases (and makes me sad) and their v6 support is mostly-ok-but-still-wonky(which also makes me sad) - and ROS 7 has been "coming soon" in the same way that Apple has been "going out of business" for 30 years. The Arista 7500R series has a lot of promise from a service provider perspective, but the MPLS stack is still under heavy development, but what's actually there has been solid. What I do like about their gear is what has typically been true of younger vendors: they listen and implement. Like Frederik stated, their roadmap is impressively full and my experience has been that they deliver on their roadmap since it's completely customer driven. For complicated SPs with lots of RSVP-TE, segment routing, complex route leaking and other multi-tenant features it may or may not be ready yet but it's getting pretty close. Interface buffers and other SP specific things are there based on their chipsets, which is encouraging, and on paper their programmability is near the top of the heap, especially if you're using something like Ansible or other access to eAPI (FWIW, we've been testing some of the programmability on smaller Arista for a bit and are so far no issues). nb ᐧ --- Nick Buraglio Energy Sciences Network; AS293 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory buraglio@es.net +1 (510) 995-6068 On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Frederik Kriewitz <frederik@kriewitz.eu> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Romeo Czumbil < Romeo.Czumbil@tierpoint.com> wrote:
So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives
or positives?
We're using the Arista 7280R with Jericho(+) chips as PE routers. We're happy with them. Stable operation, no serious issues so far.
Feature wise they're still behind the traditional vendors. Some limitations which come to mind: - reverse path filtering - prefix lists are limited to 65k entries - unexpected behaviour with route-map community add/delete (it's not possible to add a community which would be delted by a previous term) - VRF/MPLS/VPLS support is very basic - no support for unnumbered interfaces - no BGP flowspec - no BGP large communities - no subinterfaces
On the other hand all of the above (except unnumbered interfaces) are already on their 2018 road map. Traditionally they focused on their data center customers. But more and more (big) carriers are pushing Arista for the corresponding features needed by carriers.
participants (20)
-
Brandon Martin -
Colton Conor -
David Hubbard -
Dmitry Sherman -
Frederik Kriewitz -
Fredrik Korsbäck -
Jared Mauch -
Job Snijders -
joel jaeggli -
Kaiser, Erich -
Ken Chase -
Mark Tinka -
nanog＠jack.fr.eu.org -
Nicholas Buraglio -
Nick Hilliard -
Roel Parijs -
Romeo Czumbil -
Ruairi Carroll -
Saku Ytti -
Tyler Conrad