We recently supplied (4) ACE20-MOD-K9 to a customer overseas for $17k/ea. These units were previously owned spares, unused, box opened to inspect contents. All units were complete with sealed software package and EULA paperwork. The customer had a problem with recognition of the card in 6509 running SUP720-3BXL. The solution was IOS 12.2(18)SXF4 for ACE support in 6500/SUP720.
They were running 12.2-18.SXD7 and according to the requirements, they needed 12.2-18.SXF or newer and 12.2-33.SXI or newer for it to run in virtual switch mode. The ACE20-MOD-K9 run in order of release; A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I etc. etc. Customer was running D and the specs on Cisco¹s site say they need F. Note Supervisor Engine 32 does not support ACE10-6500-K9 or ACE20-MOD-K9. I am also including the link down below so you can look at it yourself. There is a section for the ACE modules in there. If you are interested take a look at this cut and paste: Application Control Engine (ACE) Module Product ID (append "=" for spares) Power Required Product Description Minimum Software Versions ACE10-6500-K9 ACE20-MOD-K9 5.23 a...@42 V Application Control Engine (ACE) module Note With releases earlier than Release 12.2(33)SXI, not supported in virtual switch mode. With Supervisor Engine 720-10GE 12.2(33)SXH With Supervisor Engine 720 12.2(18)SXF4 ACE10-6500-K9 and ACE20-MOD-K9 run their own softwareSee these publications: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6906/tsd_products_support_model_home.h tml See the ACE10-6500-K9 and ACE20-MOD-K9 software release notes for information about the minimum required service module software version. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/release /notes/ol_14271.html#wp2982155 Best regards, Larry E. Stites Northern California Networks, Inc. CA LIC# 2004 SR KH 100-484111 Nevada City, CA 95959 cell 530 320 4194 land 530 265 2588 [email protected] IM: LESGGN on 4/22/09 7:10 AM, Nick Griffin wrote: > Does anyone know if you can use or even would want to use a GSS appliance > without an ACE Module or Appliance? I like the idea of having data center > redundancy/global site selection, however I'm not so sure the load > balancing features of the ACE appliance are yet a requirement for a > particular design I am working with is worth the cost. > Thanks in advance. > > Nick Griffin > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
