I know where I have worked we have had a mixture of Juniper and Cisco
equipment. Personally buying a Juniper Router like a M or a T series is
like buying a Ferrari. I like Cisco personally and they are cheaper than
buying a Juniper. For example a M-series is always going to cost some
bucks after you factor the FPC and the PICS that need to be loaded.
Personally I like the JUNOS system better than the Cisco IOS, it is more
tech friendly when troubleshooting issues. I have not worked on the new
IOS-NX system, but if I understand it correctly it is modular. If Cisco
can the really cool Monitor command and the structure the command tree
like a Juniper. I would think Cisco did something totally right.
M.A.R
Once upon a time, Michael Ruiz <mruiz@lstfinancial.com> said:
I like Cisco personally and they are cheaper than
buying a Juniper. For example a M-series is always going to cost some
bucks after you factor the FPC and the PICS that need to be loaded.
We didn't find that to be the case, after you factor in all the Cisco
pieces that need to be loaded as well. Both make modular routers, so I
don't see how saying that one requires modules is a valid argument.
I find this usually has to do with the fact that there is no "backup to software processing" on a Juniper. Every feature it supports, it does so in hardware. If the hardware won't do it, then JUNOS won't do it.
The exception has been the multiservices PIC, which is being obsoleted with the trio chipset.
You are right, though. If you don't need the performance, you can settle for a cisco in many cases. Also, the MX Juniper line often has nicer performance than the M series if you do more ethernet than sonet.
Jack
I find this usually has to do with the fact that there is no "backup to
software processing" on a Juniper. Every feature it supports, it does
so
in hardware. If the hardware won't do it, then JUNOS won't do it.
The exception has been the multiservices PIC, which is being obsoleted
with the trio chipset.
You are right, though. If you don't need the performance, you can
settle
for a cisco in many cases. Also, the MX Juniper line often has nicer
performance than the M series if you do more ethernet than sonet.
Yeah another thing I love about the JUNOS is the rollback command. Whew
I can tell you a few times where that has saved my bacon a few times and
the commit and check command. 
Definite +1 for rollback and commit check - and also show | compare
jms
Cisco IOS has a similar feature.
reload in 5
make changes
verify things are working
reload cancel
It's a little different on a redundant processor system, as you have to reload both processors. It's also a 2-20 minute outage while you reload, but it does beat 2 hour drives.
Jack
The catch is being able to do it without reloading!
"commit confirm" will help a lot as well. In case your commit
annihilates your ssh session. 
Scott
In a message written on Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 01:48:27PM -0600, Michael Ruiz wrote:
Yeah another thing I love about the JUNOS is the rollback command. Whew
I can tell you a few times where that has saved my bacon a few times and
the commit and check command.
Cisco marketing seems to have dropped the ball on this one, but IOS
has had a feature that allows you to save a number of configurations,
do diff's, and generally behave similar to the JunOS method for
quite a while. You'll want to check out the "archive" command.
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/networking/?p=532
The only thing I can tell that's really missing is "commit confirmed" in
JunOS, and of course it operates differently so people may or may not
like it.
Cisco marketing seems to have dropped the ball on this one, but IOS has
had a feature that allows you to save a number of configurations, do
diff's, and >generally behave similar to the JunOS method for quite a
while. You'll want to check out the "archive" command.
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/networking/?p=532
The only thing I can tell that's really missing is "commit confirmed"
in JunOS, and of course it operates differently so people may or may not
like it.
--
> Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
> PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Yeah you are right it does have some JUNOS like feel.
at one shop were i considered using Juniper instead of a Cisco internet edge router, the cost of the Juniper was so close to the Cisco it was a non consideration. The only reason we went with Cisco that time was due to the fact most of the other gear was Cisco, and it seemed to make more sense to stay with cisco instead of introducing a new vendor/methods into the mix without good reason.
The hardware alone was cheaper than the Cisco kit, but after we said we needed to hold a million BGP routes, the prices became very similar. Juniper wants to license you on the amount of routes you intend to receive, if i remember correctly.
-g
Cisco IOS has a similar feature.
reload in 5
make changes
verify things are working
reload cancel
There seems to be a better way to do it in IOS that will not reload the router:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_3t/12_3t7/feature/guide/gtrollbk.html
I haven't tried it since all my gear has OOB serial mgmt but it appears to let you rollback a config after a set time without a reboot. It still doesn't seem to be as nice as JUNOS rollback.
Subway subs started offering toasted as an option in response to the
success of Quiznos Subs.
So many vendors have been chasing the "me too" feature match behind
Cisco for so many years it interesting to see Cisco doing the same
behind Juniper.
-b
Not at all the same... With JunOS, I can have the changes I made running for days, but, when some problem is later discovered I can still rollback to the previous (or several revisions back). I can easily compare the current config to several previous revisions, etc.
Additionally, with JunOS I can make all my changes, verify them syntactically, compare the changes made to the previous configuration all without having the changes take effect during the process. Then, when I'm satisfied I have it right, I commit the configuration. If you've ever had to play the IOS ACL rotation game, you know how wonderful this feature is.
Cisco's half-hearted attempt to play catch-up here is woefully inadequate.
Owen
Yeah another thing I love about the JUNOS is the rollback command.
Whew
I can tell you a few times where that has saved my bacon a few times
and
the commit and check command.
Cisco IOS has a similar feature.
reload in 5
make changes
verify things are working
reload cancel
It's a little different on a redundant processor system, as you have
to reload both processors. It's also a 2-20 minute outage while you
reload, but it does beat 2 hour drives.
Jack
Not at all the same... With JunOS, I can have the changes I made
running for days, but, when some problem is later discovered I can still
rollback to >the previous (or several revisions back). I can easily
compare the current config to several previous revisions, etc.
Additionally, with JunOS I can make all my changes, verify them
syntactically, compare the changes made to the previous configuration
all without having >the changes take effect during the process. Then,
when I'm satisfied I have it right, I commit the configuration. If
you've ever had to play the IOS ACL >rotation game, you know how
wonderful this feature is.
Cisco's half-hearted attempt to play catch-up here is woefully
inadequate.
Owen
I agree. That is the really neat feature about the
rollback command. Like I said before it has saved me more ways the one.
Cheers.. to M.A.R.'s related view
The problem is, it doesn't seem to support an automated rollback function. You'd need OOB to get access in many cases to do the rollback.
Jack
The problem is, it doesn't seem to support an automated rollback
function. You'd need OOB to get access in many cases to do the rollback.
I thought that is what 'configure terminal revert timer x' did. It looks like you have to do a 'configure confirm' before the revert time expires or it reverts back to when you started. Maybe I'll actually try this out and find out for sure.