CISCO vs Juniper for latency and jitter

[jonathanhujsak]

All,

I have a customer who initially specified Juniper M7i and M10i routers in dual redundant configurations across an 8,000 mile WAN point-to-point link. The recommendation was apparently based on latency and jitter performance. Is there any practical difference between these and,say, a CISCO 3945? What does latency typically look like for CISCO equivalents? I suspect the core routers and switches probably contribute far more than the edge interfaces which see less traffic. Reliability and rapid failover are also issues.

I also see indications that MPLS is implemented differently by Juniper and CISCO, and that interoperability can be a problem. Is this correct? If the external infrastructure is largely CISCO, perhaps for reasons of future expansion (i.e. point-to-multipoint, VPLS, etc.) Juniper should not be used in the mix.

Any help and advice would be appreciated.

[vmiller]

Latency/Jitter is more a function of the WAN itself  rather than the Routers that are connected to it.

Different carrier services can influence this. In your example, the circuit you described is point to point.

So latency will be a function of bandwidth and distance.

Juniper and Cisco can co exist, but there are occasional lapses of how "standards" might be implemented.

I can't comment on the MPLS differences. I have supported a Juniper core cisco edge solution. If you have the

necessary expertise it can work