On Thursday, September 05, 2013 08:13:27 PM Jim Thompson wrote: > Wait, wait. Show me, again where pfSense is used in a > non-trivial service provider environment in a position > where it actually routes traffic. > > And show me again where auto-update was *required*, > rather than an option?
I wasn't referring to pfSense, as the majority of service providers don't use it to forward customer traffic. > It’s all doable. (It’s just software.) but it’s > decidedly non-trivial. Actually, no - it's not just software. The interaction of integration of control plane software and mini-code that runs on line cards can be unpredictable when trying to implement things like ISSU. Moreover, if you're going to run ISSU during a maintenance window, you're better off doing a proper upgrade. In some cases, folk who have used it have had stuff "left over" with all the warm reboots, and they end up doing a proper hard reboot to clear it all anyway. > if by “isn’t always” you mean “occasionally isn’t”, fine. > If you mean “often isn’t”, then I fundamentally > disagree. I probably won't get into a war of words :-), but if you've had a chance to run IP/MPLS networks today, the quality of code is not as great as it used to be back in the day. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ List mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
