Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Router (core) for DC?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Router (core) for DC?

Hi guys,

What Router (core) do you recommend to be used in a DC? (colocation)

Cheers

Comments

  • JabJabJabJab Member

    I heard red one are faster. If not red then white.

    This is like asking what motor vehicle do you recommend. No requirements, no budget, no use case, nothing.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • Cisco because Cisco

  • @JabJab said:
    I heard red one are faster. If not red then white.

    This is like asking what motor vehicle do you recommend. No requirements, no budget, no use case, nothing.

    That was good :smile:

    At the minute I'm using Mikrotik CCR for the servers I already have in a DC, but I'm looking for other options or what other providers are using just to make an idea in the future.

    I'm looking to colocate 16x Dell PowerEdge M630 (blade) soon, but first I want to check what will be the best option for Router (core) - I would like to have 10G ports too.

    thanks!

  • @Hotmarer said:
    Cisco because Cisco

    Have any particular model in mind?

  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran

    @Hotmarer said:
    Cisco because Cisco

    I used to pronounce Cisco as Kissgo, to trigger people.
    I fucking hated this router, still do.

    Thanked by 2Hotmarer airbytes
  • @airbytes said:

    @Hotmarer said:
    Cisco because Cisco

    Have any particular model in mind?

    Yes, every from Cisco.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • EthernetServersEthernetServers Member, Patron Provider

    Have a look at the Juniper MX series.

    https://www.juniper.net/gb/en/products/routers/mx-series/compare.html

    There are other MX routers outside of those listed at the link above, like the MX5, MX10, MX40, etc.

    It's hard to give a more specific recommendation without knowing more about the expected workload.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • aquaaqua Member, Patron Provider

    MX204

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @airbytes said: Mikrotik CCR

    Don't. Both failed in our Romanian PoP, it will start with configs being lost and then they would fail to boot. For a while you can rewrite the firmware and would work for a few weeks, then die completely. I am a mikrotik fan but that series wasnt good at all.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran

    @Maounique said:

    @airbytes said: Mikrotik CCR

    Don't. Both failed in our Romanian PoP, it will start with configs being lost and then they would fail to boot. For a while you can rewrite the firmware and would work for a few weeks, then die completely. I am a mikrotik fan but that series wasnt good at all.

    I did hear some funny stories, that apparently they had/have production issues, which customers ending up with routers, that need to be pre heated to work.

    loose/not good solder joints apparently.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • HarmonyHarmony Member
    edited May 2023

    @Maounique said:

    @airbytes said: Mikrotik CCR

    Don't. Both failed in our Romanian PoP, it will start with configs being lost and then they would fail to boot. For a while you can rewrite the firmware and would work for a few weeks, then die completely. I am a mikrotik fan but that series wasnt good at all.

    The whole CCR range even CCR1072-1G-8S+?

    I was going to buy a CCR2004-16G-2S+ but heard they have issues of freezing and needing to be restarted every now and again.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    I don't remember the exact model but they were not the cheapest. They didn't last a year.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • dataforestdataforest Member, Patron Provider

    @aqua said:
    MX204

    I wouldn't do that if you have to deal with DDoS, there are better alternatives :)

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider

    @PHP_Friends said:

    @aqua said:
    MX204

    I wouldn't do that if you have to deal with DDoS, there are better alternatives :)

    Elaborate on this, please?

    Thanked by 2airbytes treesmokah
  • dataforestdataforest Member, Patron Provider

    @Clouvider said:

    @PHP_Friends said:

    @aqua said:
    MX204

    I wouldn't do that if you have to deal with DDoS, there are better alternatives :)

    Elaborate on this, please?

    High number of PPS and the MX204 will say goodbye, the linerate performance is not really good, but the device is basically cheap for that. If you pre-filter DDoS on the edge, the 204 is certainly not a bad device for the core.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • aquaaqua Member, Patron Provider

    @PHP_Friends said:

    @Clouvider said:

    @PHP_Friends said:

    @aqua said:
    MX204

    I wouldn't do that if you have to deal with DDoS, there are better alternatives :)

    Elaborate on this, please?

    High number of PPS and the MX204 will say goodbye, the linerate performance is not really good, but the device is basically cheap for that. If you pre-filter DDoS on the edge, the 204 is certainly not a bad device for the core.

    He asked for a core router, not a DDOS Protection solution.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited May 2023

    @PHP_Friends said:

    @Clouvider said:

    @PHP_Friends said:

    @aqua said:
    MX204

    I wouldn't do that if you have to deal with DDoS, there are better alternatives :)

    Elaborate on this, please?

    High number of PPS and the MX204 will say goodbye, the linerate performance is not really good, but the device is basically cheap for that. If you pre-filter DDoS on the edge, the 204 is certainly not a bad device for the core.

    We operate a large number of MX204s (among many other Juniper models, including 480s, 10ks and the newest MX304) and can't relate to what you're saying.

    Not only we comfortably handle high PPS during attack scenarios but we actually pre-filter Corero on them with Flowspec, without an issue.

    You may wish to look into your configuration, and especially any filters that you're using, to see if this might be the cause of your issues.


    with that set aside, the OP states the need for 10G ports. I have a feeling bandwidth will be an issue way before anything else, and so an external mitigation solution will be required.

    Thanked by 2airbytes vpsGOD
  • frct1frct1 Member

    Is hard to come with something better than Juniper's MX routers. Especially mx80 would be enough for small bandwidth workloads. Then you can easily upgrade to mx204 (it is awesome for what it cost and what it is able to do).

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • @Maounique said:

    @airbytes said: Mikrotik CCR

    Don't. Both failed in our Romanian PoP, it will start with configs being lost and then they would fail to boot. For a while you can rewrite the firmware and would work for a few weeks, then die completely. I am a mikrotik fan but that series wasnt good at all

    That wasnt the case for us we use solely mikrotik hardware and in like 8 years only 1 device broke and it was from a lightning strike, newer ccr are beasts nothing can beat them for 1 or 2K you bareoy get a switch from cisco at that price point

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • FlorinMarianFlorinMarian Member, Host Rep
    edited May 2023

    I guess that @PHP_Friends had a valid point of view.
    My old Cisco WS-C4948E-E can handle 131Mpps and Juniper MX204 just 1Mpps even if mine can handle only 176Gbps and Juniper MX204 can handle more than double, 400Gbps.

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran

    @FlorinMarian said:
    I guess that @PHP_Friends had a valid point of view.
    My old Cisco WS-C4948E-E can handle 131Mpps and Juniper MX204 just 1Mpps even if mine can handle only 176Gbps and Juniper MX204 can handle more than double, 400Gbps.

    You're talking absolute nonsense. Where did you pick the 1M pps number?

    I absolutely second @Clouvider that the MX204 is absolutely capable of handling high PPS during DDoS and absolutely suitable for flowspec mitigation.

  • PureVoltagePureVoltage Member, Patron Provider

    MX204 is great for most people and low power over the other larger MX line up.
    We mostly use MX204 304 and 960's depending on locations and requirements. Juniper is hard to beat when it comes to routers in my opinion.

  • LowHostingLowHosting Member, Host Rep

    @FlorinMarian said:
    I guess that @PHP_Friends had a valid point of view.
    My old Cisco WS-C4948E-E can handle 131Mpps and Juniper MX204 just 1Mpps even if mine can handle only 176Gbps and Juniper MX204 can handle more than double, 400Gbps.

    I'm sorry but if you say this it means you don't even know what you're talking about.

  • NanoG6NanoG6 Member

    Cisco because they always win the procurement here 🤣

  • LowHostingLowHosting Member, Host Rep

    @FlorinMarian said:
    I guess that @PHP_Friends had a valid point of view.
    My old Cisco WS-C4948E-E can handle 131Mpps and Juniper MX204 just 1Mpps even if mine can handle only 176Gbps and Juniper MX204 can handle more than double, 400Gbps.

    Just to make you understand what type of bullsh*t are you saying:

    The minimum amount of PPS on 400Gbps (with 1518 bytes packets):

    PPS = (400,000,000,000 bps) / (12,144 bits + 192 bits)
    PPS = 400,000,000,000 bps / 12,336 bits
    PPS ≈ 32,447,166.13

    (Calculations made by ChatGPT)

    So the minimum PPS on a 400Gbps link at the maximum packet size is about 32Mpps, just to make you understand, and the maximum amount of PPS (for 400Gbps) is about 570Mpps (I'm not saying that MX204 can manage this amount of PPS, it's just pure calculation)

  • FlorinMarianFlorinMarian Member, Host Rep

    @LowHosting said:

    @FlorinMarian said:
    I guess that @PHP_Friends had a valid point of view.
    My old Cisco WS-C4948E-E can handle 131Mpps and Juniper MX204 just 1Mpps even if mine can handle only 176Gbps and Juniper MX204 can handle more than double, 400Gbps.

    Just to make you understand what type of bullsh*t are you saying:

    The minimum amount of PPS on 400Gbps (with 1518 bytes packets):

    PPS = (400,000,000,000 bps) / (12,144 bits + 192 bits)
    PPS = 400,000,000,000 bps / 12,336 bits
    PPS ≈ 32,447,166.13

    (Calculations made by ChatGPT)

    So the minimum PPS on a 400Gbps link at the maximum packet size is about 32Mpps, just to make you understand, and the maximum amount of PPS (for 400Gbps) is about 570Mpps (I'm not saying that MX204 can manage this amount of PPS, it's just pure calculation)

    I know I said something stupid, but it was too late to edit when I realized it.
    Also on the basis of the chat I obtained the number of Mpps for Juniper and yes.. I blindly trusted GPT, without calculating anything (probably it's not the best idea to give advice at 5 in the morning).
    Thanks anyway for the clarifications.

    Thanked by 2LowHosting airbytes
  • SirNeoSirNeo Member

    @airbytes said:
    Hi guys,

    What Router (core) do you recommend to be used in a DC? (colocation)

    Cheers

    Go for Huawei PTN 6900

    Thanked by 1airbytes
  • Juniper && bugtik

Sign In or Register to comment.