We were running 12.2(18)SXF6 for the better part of 2 years now on multiple Sup720-3B's. (About 80 separate chassis).
I'd stay away from the SXF train, as we've recently finally tracked down a nasty memory leak problem, and are actually moving away from Modular, and reverting back to standard IOS. The bug we're seeing (CSCsr12976) is triggered by a 'show run' command, with it not releasing some of it's memory. After time the Kernel process winds up spiking the CPU, causing intermittent throughput issues, as well as EIGRP/HSRP flapping. The fix is to swap to the redundant supervisor. We have other chassis running the exact same code release, but non-modular, without any sorts of issues. Because of that, and the fact that from our side, we don't see any real benefit of going modular over non-modular. We have never had to restart a process, never had to patch a process (don't even remember any patches ever coming out). For us, it's not worth it so we're going back. Ken Matlock Network Analyst Exempla Healthcare (303) 467-4671 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of harbor235 Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:16 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [c-nsp] modular code for the 6500 Is anyone out there using 6500 modular code? Is it stable? I have a 6509 with 720-3B, I would like to use the modualr code but also do not want instability, any thoughts/experiences would be appreciated. mike _______________________________________________ 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/
