Cisco 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 9000) vs. Nokia 7750 Service Router (SR)

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.

Incentivized

Nokia 7750 Service Routers (SR) are good as a core switch and brings in value for money, with its high capacity switching and routing. It is suited as the best MPLS switch and has been a popular choice for L3 routing too by many SP. It is not good for distribution and access.

Incentivized

• [Cisco 9000] Series [Aggregation Services] Routers are exceptionally reliable when compared to other market options.
• One strength of Cisco routers, in general, is their compatibility with any standard market tools from other vendors.
• [It is] unmatched in terms of sheer performance.
• [It] comfortably supports very strong throughput requirements.

• MPLS switching
• VPRN
• VPLS

Incentivized

• [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.

Incentivized

• Buffer capacity
• Load balancing

Incentivized

This depends on when Cisco EOL the product.

Incentivized

The code for the switch is slightly different than the 2960X series that it is replacing, but still very familiar. It was relatively straightforward to work around this minor issue. The switch itself is solid and is very flexible as well as reliable.

Incentivized

At the time (during 2020 - COVID) there was an issue getting the new switches due to circumstances around COVID with reduced work force, etc. Generally we have not had an issue getting the product in a timely fashion.

Incentivized

The 9000 performs as the documentation states it will, we have had no performance or reliability issues with our 9000 series.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Well documented

Incentivized

Really, the only issue encountered when deploying the new 9000 series was attempting to copy a working config from an older series switch and applying it to the new 9000 series. Once it was explained that a new switch configuration needs to be built up specifically for the 9000 and deployed were the issues resolved.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

We have both Nokia 7750 and Cisco ASR 9000 in our network. The main advantage of the Nokia 7750 is its compatibility with the SAM element manager and users easily can configure using SAM. This feature is not found on ASR9k. Cisco is good for L3 routing especially BGP functionalities and peering.

Incentivized

We work directly with our vendor/partner who works closely with our ability to pay at certain times of the year due to budget restraints of public education.

Incentivized

Depending on the model of 9000, it can be as simple of a setup as needed, or can be as expandable as required. The units we purchased only had SFP ports for basic trunk line configuration

Incentivized

All questions or issues have been resolved in a timely manner.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Reliable switch with high uptime
• Good value compared to competition
• Versatile

Incentivized