nanog mailing list archives
Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup
From: Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 18:40:06 +0200
On 8/23/23 18:29, tim () pelican org wrote:
Not Trio, and different PLM :)
Yes, aware... I was just speaking in general for what is likely to be a very popular platform :-).
MX304 (well, strictly LMIC16) has the same restriction, and a need for another entry in the magic port checker (https://apps.juniper.net/home/port-checker/index.html) for restrictions beyond "SUM(port-speeds) <= 1.6T".
Yep.That trick they did where you can live with one RE and get 3 MIC's in the MX304 is... well, I guess everyone will have their own opinion.
They make sense once you've looked at the block diagram for the thing and followed the lines, but things like "4x10G breakout can only go in odd-numbered ports, and you have to leave the corresponding next-lowest even-numbered port empty" are not instantly obvious.
They do take some getting used to. But this is what comes with all the flexibility operators often seek.
Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup, (continued)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Mark Tinka (Aug 26)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Mike Hammett (Aug 27)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Mark Tinka (Aug 27)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Daniel Marks via NANOG (Aug 27)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Mark Tinka (Aug 28)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Eric Kuhnke (Aug 28)
- Message not available
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Mike Hammett (Aug 28)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Tom Beecher (Aug 28)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Dave Cohen (Aug 28)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Pascal Masha (Aug 28)
- Re: MX204 Virtual Chassis Setup Mark Tinka (Aug 23)