>From what I hear from our account people, SXF is considered a 'dead' train, and you should move to SXH or SXI. We've got a serious NAT bug in SXF14 that they're claiming won't be fixed in SXF. Sucks for our huge Sup2 base.
Chuck -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Taphouse Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 4:11 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SXH3 ghost bugs - more details Hello, > I'm curious, is bgp dampening on or off? Just to second (or third?) this bug. We've got four 7600s on SXH3 which are afflicted by this - they were upgraded from 2a on tac's advise (to avoid netflow bug related spontaneous reloads) - and we don't use dampening. It doesn't seem to matter if the prefixes that get withdrawn are i or ebgp, they get still "ghosted" to other ibgp peers. I don't have any evidence whether or not the prefixes get withdrawn to ebgp peers as we don't transit that many. I've got a case open with tac, but it's causing us enough grief that I'm moving back to SXF until things calm down. Would love the new netflow stuff in SXH if it gets stable enough... -- Peter Taphouse Bytemark Hosting http://www.bytemark-hosting.co.uk tel. +44 (0) 845 004 3 004 _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
