Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000) vs Cisco 5000 Series Network Convergence System (NCS 5000)

• In most cases, the larger ASR routers such as the 1006 and 1009s have sufficient capabilities to be used as a Core network router.
• The smaller ASRs such as the 1002 devices are best suited on the edge, capable of handling a limited number of connections due to the fixed chassis.

Read full review

• Higher port density allows for both higher bandwidth ports to the customer network as well as sufficient uplink capacity to the core.
• Small rack space, smarter design, smaller footprint allows for more hardware the fit in the same amount of rack space.
• Lower power consumption, less heat output results in savings within the data center environment.

Read full review

• Licensing on the routers is more complicated than it needs to be. We have the ASR routers along with ISR routers both have the license of the advanced service, however, on the ISR routers that license did not include the app-X feature needed to send the application specific net-flow data we wanted. It would be better if Cisco was consistence with the features included with licenses.
• Some software patches are quite involved as there is a boot loaded and IOS that must be upgraded.

Read full review

• Bugs
• Transport components stability
• Tac response time in some xases

Read full review

• Positive of ASR 1000 is its cost effectiveness as a WAN aggregation router providing 10G-100G interface limited by 200G performance.
• As such there is no negative side, but if you need more then 200 Gbps performance then you need to change the Router, that's the only option.

Read full review

• The lower power consumption helps in reducing costs, improves efficiency
• Better port density leads to less chassis upgrades, less costly upgrades
• Smaller footprint allows for more devices in the future within available colo space

Read full review