Just to be clear, the writing is on the wall for CSS not ACE.
tv
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Varriale" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] OT: Difference between the CSS and ACE
ACE is the product moving forward. Althought the EoL/S hasn't been
announced the writing is on the wall.
The most important thing moving forward is that your existing requirements
on CSS map into ACE. The ACE doesn't have feature parity yet (and the
blade and appliance even have different stuff) so be careful.
tv
----- Original Message -----
From: "Felix Nkansah" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 4:42 PM
Subject: [c-nsp] OT: Difference between the CSS and ACE
Hi Team,
Pardon me if this question seems dumb. I have deployed a number of Cisco
Content Services Switches for clients who needed Layer 4-7 application
load
balancing and acceleration for their web-based applications in the data
centre.
I am presently reviewing the datasheet of the Cisco Application Control
Engine and find its role to be similar to the CSS.
Under what scenarios or requirements would one prefer the ACE to the CSS?
In
what way is the ACE different from the CSS?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Felix
_______________________________________________
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/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
