Cisco 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 9000)
Juniper Enterprise Routers
Considered Both Products
Cisco 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 9000)
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Cisco 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 9000)
We have replaced our [Cisco] 9000 [Series Aggregation Services Routers] with NCS 5500. The [Cisco] 9000 [Series Aggregation Services Routers] was able to handle the features we needed better than the NCS. We had to move our layer 2 down to Nexus switches.
Chose Cisco 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 9000)
From the performance point of view, I have not noticed any issues in our environment for this. From the operation point of view, [there] was a learning [curve] to the new IOS when we used Juniper routers, but not really an issue after the first installation.
Cisco 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 9000)
Juniper Enterprise Routers
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
It is very well suited to act as your aggregator / core switch for mid to large facilities. it is flexible enough to really be useable in small environments but costs may hinder that. It has redundancy of power and management blades that does add a lot of peace of mind and security. Really the only reason you would not use a 9000 series is frankly cost and/or real requirements for performance. They have several versions of this model, plus they have an entire set of lines that can accommodate nearly as much as the 9000. Less demand or less of a budget can weigh in the decision to select this particular model.
As an edge/WAN router that contains internet BGP routes, it handles this work very well. And the devices are robust, able to manage a significant load. However, the interface cost can be somewhat of a hindrance when wanting to use it to interconnect many metro clients.
[The] upgrade process [is] overly complicated compared to NX-OS or IOS. New images and the current configuration need to be compiled into "golden IOS's". If you don't include the configuration, you will have a clean device with no configuration.
[There are] major bugs in every release. We have had to cycle through all of our routers 3 times in the last year for updates due to show-stopping bugs that did not come to light until after the changes were made in production.
[It has] terrible documentation. You have to mine their site to get to any documentation for recent versions of IOS-XR. If you make the leap from 32-bit cXR to 64-bit eXR, then the documentation is more or less non-existent. Due to the internal architecture of hardware itself, technical specs can change from software version to software version, so don't expect any sort of firm scalability numbers. You'll have to rely on your sales engineer for that.
I would like to able to find more examples of configs. Given the multiple ways to configure the same setting, having a little more documentation would be helpful.
In some ways, the platform is a big improvement over our previous IOS and NX-OS devices: They offer version-controlled configuration staging/commits. They have a robust portfolio of network protocols and features even beyond datacenter devices. Due to the use of NPUs instead of relying entirely on ASICs for forwarding, new versions of the software are able to improve hardware performance and capacity. Unfortunately, I have run into more bugs on IOS-XR than I ever did on IOS or even NX-OS (which has a shocking number of bugs of its own) and you have to be a licensing guru to get your order right the first time.
Juniper support is friendly, easy to understand, widely knowledgeable, and easy to get ahold of. I did not give them a higher rating as some of my more complex issues, were solved by myself while under consultation from Juniper TAC.
When we are integrating the ASR9000 router with other devices then there should be the same device that can cater to the throughput. We can use the Cisco 9600 Switch which can be easily integrated and can handle the speed in terms of uplinks 40G can be handled. Adding to this Cisco DNA Center can be integrated to do the automation and monitoring purposes.
The simplicity, elegance, and robustness of Juniper's solution make it much easier to troubleshoot and configure, when compared to Cisco Routers, especially considering Cisco's implementation of BGP (why are IPv4 and IPv6 linked in Cisco configuration?). Furthermore, the implementation of commit and rollback cannot be understated when compared to the Cisco solutions. This feature is a huge time saver when attempting to troubleshoot and remote configuration instances.
We didn't need to buy new devices when we were increasing backbone capacity from 1G to 10G.
Due to the modular nature of the software, when there is an issue with any running services, we need not reboot the whole device which affects all clients and availability.
The stability and robustness of this solution provide a rock-solid foundation for all of our internet traffic.
The easy to use rollback and commit features simplifies remote administration and configuration, alleviating the need to travel to remote installation sites.
