[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

best practice for number of RR

Subject: best practice for number of RR
From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 13:31:50 +0200
In-reply-to: <CACTuH9f=zPw6K_q79Hj75Nabi+q0x2ituEa=zcLpWisZji33mw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTuH9fLGv3nvpUb-_KSD_MiD3UvcGSs9wU4r8UTQhOUWRTrCg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ_LqoEkYBJa6EZQF44RMEuKG+L2DMJ53y1xt7-YjC+dFroAAg@mail.gmail.com> <CACTuH9f=zPw6K_q79Hj75Nabi+q0x2ituEa=zcLpWisZji33mw@mail.gmail.com>

On 1/Aug/15 18:34, marco da pieve wrote:
> Hi Shane,
> for the boxes that are currently installed in the network, this is not a
> valid option (politically/commercially speaking).

Well, Cisco, Juniper and ALU are shipping carrier-grade OS's that will
run on a server in a VM.

Brocade is also known to be doing good work there re: Vyatta, but I
don't know of anyone running that as an RR.

In 2015, I'd never spend money on a dedicated RR running on router
hardware. Server, VM, end of story.

Mark.

References:
- best practice for number of RR
  - From: mdapieve at gmail.com (marco da pieve)
- best practice for number of RR
  - From: shane at ronan-online.com (Shane Ronan)
- best practice for number of RR
  - From: mdapieve at gmail.com (marco da pieve)

Prev by Date: best practice for number of RR
Next by Date: Quakecon: Network Operations Center tour
Previous by thread: best practice for number of RR
Next by thread: best practice for number of RR
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread