Cisco 900 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR) vs. Juniper MX Series

No problems with any of the Cisco 900 Series [Integrated Services Routers] (ISR) platform features within the enterprise environment. Because these devices are running a version of IOS-XE as opposed to traditional IOS, some of the more 'basic' configurations can become more complex. In the end, the 900 Series is still able to provide the required functionality, but there is a learning curve.

Incentivized

It is well suited as a WAN/Internet Edge device. It is easy to configure BGP, contexts and routing instances. Its suite of tools has saved our organization money by being able to provide services (tag stacking, for example) that our provider would normally charge us more for. Due to interface cost this would not be appropriate as a LAN aggregation device.

Incentivized

• [It] works great full-featured, but [I recommend a] small router for remote sites.
• [It] can handle more traffic than it even advertises!
• [It has a] well-priced option for smaller or less critical sites.

Incentivized

• Junos OS is great. Roll back feature is a life saver
• Powerful, they handle all of our bandwidth needs with ease.
• Dependable, they have not had any issue in the last 5 years.

Incentivized

• [It has a] pay as you grow model of licensing, but, [in my opinion, is] a pain to implement.
• [The] service impacting license application [could be improved].
• Configuration complexity [could be improved].

Incentivized

• Sometimes I wish that documentation was more robust, complete, though this has been improved of late.
• It would be nice if netflow was easier to configure.
• It would be nice if the platform was cheaper.

Incentivized

Juniper (Junos) and interoperability. Junos is so powerful as a troubleshooting tool and also as a configuration tool. We had test and roll back configurations which is very helpful. Being able to link to over vendors equipment and extend features is very nice to have.

Incentivized

I have similar feelings about the NCS 5500 Series Router. IOS-XR is great, but the need to upgrade components to support newer features seems like a planning oversight. 400G Linecards are great and needed.... but they need all new power supplies? Really? Also, the ability to use lags across multiple linecards would be nice. I'm pretty sure that's not available, but that is more understandable.

Incentivized

We preferred Juniper over Cisco for our WAN/Internet routing needs for a number of reasons. First was the price, the Juniper offering was much more competitive than Cisco's. Secondly, was feature set, Juniper's implementation of routing protocols, routing tables, and forwarding options are better thought-out than Cisco's (not to mention Juniper's longstanding use of commit/confirm/rollback features, which Cisco has only started to use recently, and only on some of their products).

Incentivized

• Lots of money saved in downgrading from less useful and older full-sized routers at small sites
• Time saved having to learn new commands (web GUI works great)
• Saves time training staff to manage them

Incentivized

• Being dependable has allowed our network to stay running allowing for everyone to be productive.
• Cost of the routers was very reasonable allowing us to keep our budget under control.
• Support cost on our routers is not terribly high.
• We link our routers to Cisco and Aruba with no issue. Interoperable give us flexibility of choice

Incentivized