> On 16 Nov 2017, at 08:49, Gert Doering <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:03:50PM +0100, ??ukasz Bromirski wrote: >> 2901 supports VRRP. > > Yes, but not VRRPv3 for IPv6 (at least in the code base we've rolled > out, haven't investigated if it's in some sort of 15.6T or later).
It may be. That’s from my home terminal server: rtr-ts#sh ver | i IOS Cisco IOS Software, C2900 Software (C2900-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.6(2)T1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) rtr-ts(config)#fhrp version vrrp v3 That’s a version that was published July last year. >> Those things are ???PI??? code (Platform Independent). > Right, so why is there no HSRPv2 on ASR920, or EIGRP on NCS5000, or static > LSPs on 6500? These are all control plane features, independent off the > underlying hardware. It’s up to BU to pull the code. I never wrote anywhere that, You know, everybody is pulling all the code they can find just for the sake of having everything :) The trend these days is exactly opposite thanks to years of roasting us (Cisco) for having too much features and in effect - too much bugs. PMs for BUs it seems started to be picky in terms of what goes in. This is in addition to the fact, that right now every new platform should run IOS-XE, which by itself is perfectly capable of running modular, and this again add options. ASR 9xx are quite complex in terms of hardware offload capabilities BTW, and each SKU may have it’s own ‘specialities’. It’s worth double-checking release notes and config guides with local SE before booking time for testing. Having said that - there may be some hardware dependencies with HSRP or LSPs (for EIGRP the only think I can think of is no immediate need to run it in SP networks). But that’s just me guessing, not our official policy. >> As soon as you hit hardware dependencies however in platforms that >> offload something to hardware??? yes, world isn???t a fairy tale, no matter >> which >> vendor you decide to lock-in-to. > > I fully understand hardware limitations, coming from a world full of > 6500 :-) - and the 6500/7600 split was a good example of "no, these lacking > features have nothing to do with hardware capabilities”. I know You do :) > Things like missing EIGRP or HSRPv2 cannot even be properly explained > with BU in-fighting (like, OTV vs EVPN) if the code is already there for > the OS used… It’s probably more like Inception (the movie). Layers of layers over layers of different requests, priorities, platform positioning challenges, and so on. -- Łukasz Bromirski CCIE R&S/SP #15929, CCDE #2012::17, PGP Key ID: 0xFD077F6A _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
