Thank you all for the input. Especially Gary who wrote off list: > IOS reliability, as for most software, depends to a large extent on > how often one exercises those parts of the software that simply are > less used and tested. I have never run into problems with any IOS for > the simple case of forwarding packets. > Add in a routing protocol, or complex prioritization and queueing, or > packet modification(s), (or Appletalk or IPX!), and one will be using > code paths that may be less common, and more likely to have bugs or > side effects.
I think is a very good argument and will include it in our descriptions. > I have never seen a list of the IOS features that indicate how many > customers are using them, and therefore how extensively tested those > code paths are "in the real world", and the matrix of those features > (customer uses CoPP + MQC + ISIS, etc), and what the MTBF numbers are. > I doubt anyone has that info. That's too bad. I guess some data mining in all the TAC cases could give some idea about the maturity of features / feature combinations. > In other words, my guess is is that you are on your own. (Are you > happier now?) Very much so. :-) Thanks! Regards, Peter _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
