Mailing List Archive

Cisco 8000
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
Hi,

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 07:40:50PM +0200, Saku Ytti wrote:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/8000-series-routers/index.html#~product-series

How nice of that page to include a reference to Cisco Capital right
away :-)

gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
Wonder how much one of those costs.....

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:15 PM Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 07:40:50PM +0200, Saku Ytti wrote:
> >
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/8000-series-routers/index.html#~product-series
>
> How nice of that page to include a reference to Cisco Capital right
> away :-)
>
> gert
> --
> "If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
> feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never
> doubted
> it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
> Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh
> Mistress
>
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
> gert@greenie.muc.de
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
Hi,

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 02:43:27PM -0500, Shawn L wrote:
> Wonder how much one of those costs.....

If you need to ask, you can't afford one.

gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 11/12/2019 19:51, Gert Doering wrote:
> If you need to ask, you can't afford one.


Wait, I thought you *needed* to ask if you wanted to afford one?

--
Tom
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
Hi,

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 07:54:10PM +0000, Tom Hill wrote:
> On 11/12/2019 19:51, Gert Doering wrote:
> > If you need to ask, you can't afford one.
>
> Wait, I thought you *needed* to ask if you wanted to afford one?

"Just send me two of the up-to-the-right models, and have your financial
people deal with my financial people, I don't care for the details"

gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
Wow, they finally made them official!

--
Sebastian Becker
sb@lab.dtag.de

> Am 11.12.2019 um 18:42 schrieb Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>:
>
> ?https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/8000-series-routers/index.html#~product-series
>
>
> --
> ++ytti
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
+1

--
Sebastian Becker
sb@lab.dtag.de

> Am 11.12.2019 um 20:58 schrieb Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de>:
>
> ?Hi,
>
>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 07:54:10PM +0000, Tom Hill wrote:
>>> On 11/12/2019 19:51, Gert Doering wrote:
>>> If you need to ask, you can't afford one.
>>
>> Wait, I thought you *needed* to ask if you wanted to afford one?
>
> "Just send me two of the up-to-the-right models, and have your financial
> people deal with my financial people, I don't care for the details"
>
> gert
> --
> "If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
> feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
> it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
> Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
>
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 at 21:52, Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de> wrote:


> > Wonder how much one of those costs.....
>
> If you need to ask, you can't afford one.

I'm skeptical if there is any company in the world where IP CAPEX is
significant contributor to bottom line. At any rate, the market will
pay Jericho2 level prices for this, if they want to sell, that is what
it'll cost.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
This is a silly question but why call it the 8000 if it's supposed to be the successor to the 9900?


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Sebastian Becker
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 2:58 PM
To: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>
Cc: cisco-nsp NSP <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

Wow, they finally made them official!

--
Sebastian Becker
sb@lab.dtag.de

> Am 11.12.2019 um 18:42 schrieb Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>:
>
> ?https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/8000-series-routers/in
> dex.html#~product-series
>
>
> --
> ++ytti
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:00:21PM +0000, Drew Weaver wrote:
> This is a silly question but why call it the 8000 if it's supposed to be the successor to the 9900?
>

But it's not.

8000 is more or less "successor" to NCS 5500 than ASR9K. But in all seriousness, 8000 seems like Cisco's counter-answer to Juniper QFX10K/PE chip.

NCS 5500 sounds like it will continue to remain as Cisco's merchant silicon networking offering for customers that want it. So comparable to Juniper's QFX5K line up but with way more functional buffer sizing?

8000 sounds like "low cost per bit, scale up, mid-level features on Cisco owned chip" targeted to compete against QFX10K/new PTX.

ASR9K would remain as run-to-completion high touch platform. In fact, we've already been informed by our account team that new A99 400GE cards will be shipping soon.


James
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
I don't know.

I think the 8201 is what the 9901 should have been as far as hardware, or even the 9901 should've been 36x100GE.

I guess it's possible they could release a fixed 99xx that has a sane port configuration.


-----Original Message-----
From: James Jun <james@towardex.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 9:08 AM
To: Drew Weaver <drew.weaver@thenap.com>
Cc: 'cisco-nsp NSP' <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:00:21PM +0000, Drew Weaver wrote:
> This is a silly question but why call it the 8000 if it's supposed to be the successor to the 9900?
>

But it's not.

8000 is more or less "successor" to NCS 5500 than ASR9K. But in all seriousness, 8000 seems like Cisco's counter-answer to Juniper QFX10K/PE chip.

NCS 5500 sounds like it will continue to remain as Cisco's merchant silicon networking offering for customers that want it. So comparable to Juniper's QFX5K line up but with way more functional buffer sizing?

8000 sounds like "low cost per bit, scale up, mid-level features on Cisco owned chip" targeted to compete against QFX10K/new PTX.

ASR9K would remain as run-to-completion high touch platform. In fact, we've already been informed by our account team that new A99 400GE cards will be shipping soon.


James
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 16:08, James Jun <james@towardex.com> wrote:

> 8000 is more or less "successor" to NCS 5500 than ASR9K. But in all seriousness, 8000 seems like Cisco's counter-answer to Juniper QFX10K/PE chip.

Longer term goal is to cover edge too, it is run to completion NPU to
my best of knowledge (or 2-3 on ingress, 1 on egress, identical npus,
but different role/code, not entirely unlike Nokia FP4
pipeline-of-npus design, just way shorter pipeline than FP4).

Long tail of ASR9k is long (GSR is still supported) but I think Cisco
sees this silicon as eventually covering ASR9k portfolio, time will
tell.



--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:11:44PM +0000, Drew Weaver wrote:
> I don't know.
>
> I think the 8201 is what the 9901 should have been as far as hardware, or even the 9901 should've been 36x100GE.
>
> I guess it's possible they could release a fixed 99xx that has a sane port configuration.

I agree that ASR-9901 (Starlord) was not the strong response the market was looking for from Cisco, but they had to go to war with what they had available at the time (Tomahawk/EZchip NP). This meant MX204 competition with twice the HW footprint, much higher power draw, etc :-p

They should have named Starlord "9001-E" or "9001-X" instead of using the 9901 name. I guess the next Lightspeed-based fixed/small A99 box will just have to be called between 9901 and 9904 (lol).

But product line up wise, may be someone from Cisco can confirm, but based on conversations we've had with our representatives, 8000 isn't replacing ASR9K. They are for different areas of the network or use cases, much like QFX10k/PE chip PTX boxes aren't replacing MX series on Juniper land either anytime soon.


James
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
Hi Drew,

maybe because the 10k is taken by an actual series of routers from Juniper and Cisco had a 10k already but this is retired:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/obsolete/routers/cisco-10000-series-routers.html <https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/obsolete/routers/cisco-10000-series-routers.html>

--
Sebastian Becker
sb@lab.dtag.de

> Am 12.12.2019 um 15:00 schrieb Drew Weaver <drew.weaver@thenap.com>:
>
> This is a silly question but why call it the 8000 if it's supposed to be the successor to the 9900?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Sebastian Becker
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 2:58 PM
> To: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>
> Cc: cisco-nsp NSP <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000
>
> Wow, they finally made them official!
>
> --
> Sebastian Becker
> sb@lab.dtag.de
>
>> Am 11.12.2019 um 18:42 schrieb Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>:
>>
>> ?https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/8000-series-routers/in
>> dex.html#~product-series
>>
>>
>> --
>> ++ytti
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 17:10, Sebastian Becker <sb@lab.dtag.de> wrote:

> maybe because the 10k is taken by an actual series of routers from Juniper and Cisco had a 10k already but this is retired:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/obsolete/routers/cisco-10000-series-routers.html

There is also Cisco Firewpower 8k and ATM switch Cisco MGX 8k, keeps
things exciting.


--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 12/12/19 4:15 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 17:10, Sebastian Becker <sb@lab.dtag.de> wrote:
>
>> maybe because the 10k is taken by an actual series of routers from Juniper and Cisco had a 10k already but this is retired:
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/obsolete/routers/cisco-10000-series-routers.html
>
> There is also Cisco Firewpower 8k and ATM switch Cisco MGX 8k, keeps
> things exciting.

... and Cisco 4000 / Cisco Catalyst 4000 ...
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 12/12/2019 16:47, Bryan Holloway wrote:
>
>
> On 12/12/19 4:15 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 17:10, Sebastian Becker <sb@lab.dtag.de> wrote:
>>
>>> maybe because the 10k is taken by an actual series of routers from
>>> Juniper and Cisco had a 10k already but this is retired:
>>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/obsolete/routers/cisco-10000-series-routers.html
>>>
>>
>> There is also Cisco Firewpower 8k and ATM switch Cisco MGX 8k, keeps
>> things exciting.
>
> ... and Cisco 4000 / Cisco Catalyst 4000 ...
>
I think it is well established that there is no rhyme nor reason to
Cisco product naming, apart that,simply, that part numbers must be unique.

--
Giles Coochey

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
NCS5500 is Broadcom StrataDNX family (Jericho), Juniper QFX5k is StrataXGS family (Trident/Tomahawk), the platforms aren’t really comparable as while they share some similarities on paper they are very different beasts in the reality.

The NCS5500 would be positioned more towards the QFX10k in market position (QFX/PTX10k and NCS5500 are around the same price point on $/Mbit port cost) but the Juniper silicon will blow the Jericho out of the water for most things with the exclusion of eTCAM Cisco plumbed into some of the NCS.

This new 8000 series will, imo, sit at a tier higher than NCS5500 with the NCS being the “cheap and cheerful but somewhat restricted and quirky” merchant silicon box, and the 8000 having the merchant silicon restrictions removed.

Will be interesting to see how market penetration plays out beyond the hyperscalers.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 12, 2019, at 9:08 AM, James Jun <james@towardex.com> wrote:
>
> ?On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:00:21PM +0000, Drew Weaver wrote:
>> This is a silly question but why call it the 8000 if it's supposed to be the successor to the 9900?
>>
>
> But it's not.
>
> 8000 is more or less "successor" to NCS 5500 than ASR9K. But in all seriousness, 8000 seems like Cisco's counter-answer to Juniper QFX10K/PE chip.
>
> NCS 5500 sounds like it will continue to remain as Cisco's merchant silicon networking offering for customers that want it. So comparable to Juniper's QFX5K line up but with way more functional buffer sizing?
>
> 8000 sounds like "low cost per bit, scale up, mid-level features on Cisco owned chip" targeted to compete against QFX10K/new PTX.
>
> ASR9K would remain as run-to-completion high touch platform. In fact, we've already been informed by our account team that new A99 400GE cards will be shipping soon.
>
>
> James
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 11/Dec/19 19:40, Saku Ytti wrote:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/8000-series-routers/index.html#~product-series

So how ominous - we met Cisco and Juniper in the last couple of weeks to
re-assess a core router refresh (our CRS-X boxes are still going strong,
but the 100Gbps line cards on those things cost a whole heap).

So while I was e-mailing my Cisco AM team yesterday, I went to their web
site to look at what we discussed earlier per their suggestion; the
NCS5500. And while looking at it, I find out about Silicon One, which
then sends me to the 8000 series routers.

I quickly notice that the NCS6000 is no longer on that list of "core
routers".

To be honest, I'm not sure whether I trust Cisco's long-term vision
about their core routers. The CRS-X, which still has plenty of juice, is
being abandoned, even though I think it still has at least 10 more years
in it. Then it was the NCS5000 they were proposing for a decent core to
compete against Juniper and Arista. Now I'm seeing the 8000, which uses
their own custom silicon and is likely to contradict their message of
pushing the NCS5000 as a core router, which is a Broadcom-based router.

Last thing I want is to find myself less than 5 years into a box only to
be told that they aren't feeling it anymore, which is what happened when
we picked up the CRS-X back in 2014 :-\...

Meanwhile, I'm told that the NCS6000 is still available, but only for
customers that need multi-chassis and that. I mean, in 2020, how many of
those are still around, if not about 3 or 4?

Mark.

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 12/Dec/19 09:23, Saku Ytti wrote:

>
> I'm skeptical if there is any company in the world where IP CAPEX is
> significant contributor to bottom line. At any rate, the market will
> pay Jericho2 level prices for this, if they want to sell, that is what
> it'll cost.

I think so too.

Mark.

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 12/Dec/19 16:17, James Jun wrote:

>
> I agree that ASR-9901 (Starlord) was not the strong response the market was looking for from Cisco, but they had to go to war with what they had available at the time (Tomahawk/EZchip NP). This meant MX204 competition with twice the HW footprint, much higher power draw, etc :-p

Same discussion I had with them 2 weeks ago. The 9901 isn't really an
answer to the MX204.

Ultimately, I'd like to see an ASR920-10G, which gives us 12 - 24 ports
of 1/10Gbps, with 4x 10Gbps and/or 2x 100Gbps uplinks, running IOS XE. I
think a box like this would be more competitive than the MX204 for
Metro-E deployments where customers need 10Gbps last mile in the Access.

We'll see if they listen.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
There is a new 920, the ASR-920-12SZ with 12 10/1 gid ports. I think it's
a move in the right direction, but I agree, some faster uplink ports would
be nice.

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 2:00 AM Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:

>
>
> On 12/Dec/19 16:17, James Jun wrote:
>
> >
> > I agree that ASR-9901 (Starlord) was not the strong response the market
> was looking for from Cisco, but they had to go to war with what they had
> available at the time (Tomahawk/EZchip NP). This meant MX204 competition
> with twice the HW footprint, much higher power draw, etc :-p
>
> Same discussion I had with them 2 weeks ago. The 9901 isn't really an
> answer to the MX204.
>
> Ultimately, I'd like to see an ASR920-10G, which gives us 12 - 24 ports
> of 1/10Gbps, with 4x 10Gbps and/or 2x 100Gbps uplinks, running IOS XE. I
> think a box like this would be more competitive than the MX204 for
> Metro-E deployments where customers need 10Gbps last mile in the Access.
>
> We'll see if they listen.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
On 15/Dec/19 16:16, Shawn L wrote:
> There is a new 920, the ASR-920-12SZ with 12 10/1 gid ports. I think it's
> a move in the right direction, but I agree, some faster uplink ports would
> be nice.

Yes, that one doesn't really cut it because, technically, you'll lose
either 2 or 4 ports to run the uplinks.

So for customer-facing, you're down to either 8 or 6 ports, which is not
very dense at all, even for the fewer customers buying 10Gbps in the Metro.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: Cisco 8000 [ In reply to ]
We’re about to get a few of these boxes in our shop. One limitation of these units is no modular PSUs, and the AC model is limited to one power input. (The DC model, the model we chose, has two internal PSUs.) We’ll see if the feature set is similar to the rest of the line.

-Brian

> On Dec 15, 2019, at 8:17 AM, Shawn L <shawn@rmrf.us> wrote:
>
> ?There is a new 920, the ASR-920-12SZ with 12 10/1 gid ports. I think it's
> a move in the right direction, but I agree, some faster uplink ports would
> be nice.
>
>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 2:00 AM Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 12/Dec/19 16:17, James Jun wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree that ASR-9901 (Starlord) was not the strong response the market
>> was looking for from Cisco, but they had to go to war with what they had
>> available at the time (Tomahawk/EZchip NP). This meant MX204 competition
>> with twice the HW footprint, much higher power draw, etc :-p
>>
>> Same discussion I had with them 2 weeks ago. The 9901 isn't really an
>> answer to the MX204.
>>
>> Ultimately, I'd like to see an ASR920-10G, which gives us 12 - 24 ports
>> of 1/10Gbps, with 4x 10Gbps and/or 2x 100Gbps uplinks, running IOS XE. I
>> think a box like this would be more competitive than the MX204 for
>> Metro-E deployments where customers need 10Gbps last mile in the Access.
>>
>> We'll see if they listen.
>>
>> Mark.
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

1 2 3  View All