HPE Enterprise Routers vs. Juniper MX Series

HPE routers are best suited for the mid-sized enterprises, they have proven ability to cope up the LAN traffic, as well as traffic runs between two different sites, by using the MPLS or VPLS circuits. In our environment, we are keeping the HPE routers at the edge of the network connected with the firewall on the backend which segregates the inside and outside traffic. We are running the BGP protocol to load balance the inbound and outbound traffic coming from different admin routers.

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

• Routing
• Establishing the MPLS connectivity
• VPN
• BGP

Incentivized

• It's a robust platform, very resilient. It handles large traffic flows well.
• It's a flexible architecture, it can be configured with provider or enterprise options (or both!)
• It has an excellent versioning system, simple commit/confirm/rollback procedures!

Incentivized

• HPE routers can start building the Service Provider Grade routers.
• HPE routers can have better support experience.
• HPE routers can lower the prices.

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

HPE routers performs upto the mark, it basically provides the connectivity to external and internal networks, however sometime the crashes happen in the routers make them look bad. Overall, I am satisfied with the product they use most open-source stuff which makes them easily interoperable with other router vendors as well.

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

• HPE routers help route the traffic from our enterprise to external routers.
• HPE routers help with making sure the availability of network to enterprise.
• HPE routers has been supporting enterprise network traffic routing from years.

Incentivized

• Its flexible architecture and configuration styles has saved our organization money by providing feature we would have otherwise needed to purchase from our ISPs.
• It has a long and healthy lifecycle, with potential upgrades for more performance if needed. (This helps alleviate the downtime associated with chassis replacement.)
• The only drawback is some of the highest throughput interfaces are expensive.

Incentivized