On May 26, 2013, at 9:06 PM, Reuben Farrelly reuben-cisco-...@reub.net wrote:
On 27/05/2013 10:37 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
Basically all the images go through EFT with almost no exceptions.
Problem most vendors have is getting good feedback from the sites
with that early code. Seen that for
On Sun, 26 May 2013, Marc wrote:
Not exactly what IOS-XR is doing. At least the number of new features in
4.2.x or 4.3.x is decreasing with increasing x. But it's not just bug
fixes.
For XR, I'm talking the (rollup) SMU PACKs they're doing now. The feedback
I'm giving Cisco is that this is
On May 23, 2013, at 8:36 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Jared Mauch wrote:
That seems to be what the SE in the (now trimmed reference) was suggesting.
I understand not everyone has lab/test hardware, but if that's the case how
can you ever upgrade
Basically all the images go through EFT with almost no exceptions. Problem most
vendors have is getting good feedback from the sites with that early code. Seen
that for over a decade with many vendors.
Jared Mauch
On May 26, 2013, at 6:58 PM, Marc m...@sniff.de wrote:
you wait until the big
On 27/05/2013 10:37 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
Basically all the images go through EFT with almost no exceptions.
Problem most vendors have is getting good feedback from the sites
with that early code. Seen that for over a decade with many vendors.
Jared Mauch
Valuing good feedback hasn't been my
Fortunately we didnt run the L2vpn for BGP.
You are running 4.3.0 in your production network? Any other critical issue
you found in this version?
2013/5/23 Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca
The one I was told about was CSCub89995. BGP with L2VPN/LDP BGP
signalling. Fixed in 4.3.1.
On
If 4.3.1 is too new to run why did they release it? I Love SE logic at times.
Sounds like he just said Cisco will deliberately ship defective software. I
would seek a new SE.
Jared Mauch
On May 23, 2013, at 1:36 AM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently I got the MP-BGP
Hi,
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 07:12:48AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
If 4.3.1 is too new to run why did they release it? I Love SE logic at times.
Sounds like he just said Cisco will deliberately ship defective software. I
would seek a new SE.
Oh, well, I can see that logic. There is so
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Jared Mauch wrote:
If 4.3.1 is too new to run why did they release it? I Love SE logic at times.
Sounds like he just said Cisco will deliberately ship defective software. I
would seek a new SE.
Why would you want to replace an honest SE?
Everybody knows you wait at
So everyone waits and nobody reports a bug for the first 6 months?
I summarily reject your irrational fears of new software. Software is
imperfect in all cases.
I have specific defects that are keeping me from 4.3.1, these also exist in
4.2.3. Are you hitting the same bugs? I don't know.
There was an SNMP issue where you had to sometimes restart the SNMP process,
but an SMU fixed that, I think.
I never ran into it, but I heard about it.
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013-05-23, at 2:12 AM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote:
Fortunately we didnt run the L2vpn for BGP.
You are
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Jared Mauch wrote:
So everyone waits and nobody reports a bug for the first 6 months?
Obviously not.
I summarily reject your irrational fears of new software. Software is
imperfect in all cases.
It seems more imperfect shortly after release than after a while.
I have
Our deployment today is centered on 4.2.3. I'd like to see the bugs we have in
4.2.3 that are unfixed in 4.3.1 to be addressed so we have a clear case to move
forward.
- Jared
On May 22, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote:
Any specific reason why u want to upgrade from
On May 23, 2013, at 8:36 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Jared Mauch wrote:
So everyone waits and nobody reports a bug for the first 6 months?
Obviously not.
That seems to be what the SE in the (now trimmed reference) was suggesting. I
understand not
The problem with the wait and see approach is it is a tragedy of the
commons approach. You're just outsourcing the effort to the cloud and
hoping others are more adventurous than you are. Eventually critical mass
is reached, and then even older code versions have the bugs, they last
longer, and
On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 12:59 -0500, Blake Dunlap wrote:
The problem with the wait and see approach is it is a tragedy of the
commons approach. You're just outsourcing the effort to the cloud
and hoping others are more adventurous than you are. Eventually
critical mass is reached, and then even
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Blake Dunlap wrote:
The problem with the wait and see approach is it is a tragedy of the
commons approach. You're just outsourcing the effort to the cloud and
hoping others are more adventurous than you are. Eventually critical
mass is reached, and then even older code
I would like to know if anyone running BGP on IOS XR 4.3.0 or 4.3.1 and if so,
are you having any issues? We are being told the most stable version for BGP
is 4.2.3 but I've also heard of some bugs with this version that have been
fixed in 4.3.1.
Thank you,
Shane
Running 4.3.0 with MP-BGP and it works just fine. Planning a mass upgrade of
my others to 4.3.1.
4.2.x always bugged me because of odd input drops that TAC wasn't able to
identify, so I'm happy to finally be able to get off that train.
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013-05-22, at 8:04 AM, Shane
-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Shane Heupel
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 2:05 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] IOS XR 4.3.0 or 4.3.1
I would like to know if anyone running BGP on IOS XR 4.3.0 or 4.3.1 and if
so, are you having any issues? We
: Adam Vitkovsky [mailto:adam.vitkov...@swan.sk]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 7:51 AM
To: Shane Heupel; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc: 'Jared Mauch'
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] IOS XR 4.3.0 or 4.3.1
Shane, Jared,
I guess we all have been told by our SEs that the 4.2.3 is the safe harbor.
So I'm really
On May 22, 2013, at 8:50 AM, Adam Vitkovsky adam.vitkov...@swan.sk wrote:
Shane, Jared,
I guess we all have been told by our SEs that the 4.2.3 is the safe harbor.
So I'm really curious what bugs made you abandon 4.2.3 and made your choice
to rather go with 4.3.x instead.
Would you
Any specific reason why u want to upgrade from 4.3.0 to 4.3.1?
Appreciate your comments.
On May 22, 2013 8:39 PM, Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca wrote:
Running 4.3.0 with MP-BGP and it works just fine. Planning a mass upgrade
of my others to 4.3.1.
4.2.x always bugged me because of odd input
I'm looking at VPLS and my SE has told me that there were some bugs that were
fixed in 4.3.1 regarding MP-BGP, mostly.
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013-05-22, at 11:13 PM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote:
Any specific reason why u want to upgrade from 4.3.0 to 4.3.1?
Appreciate your comments.
Currently I got the MP-BGP configurations, both the VPNv4 and VPNv6, not
sure there is any bug inside or not, SE told me just use the 4.3.0, 4.3.1
is too new.
2013/5/23 Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca
I'm looking at VPLS and my SE has told me that there were some bugs that
were fixed in 4.3.1
The one I was told about was CSCub89995. BGP with L2VPN/LDP BGP signalling.
Fixed in 4.3.1.
On 2013-05-23, at 1:36 AM, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently I got the MP-BGP configurations, both the VPNv4 and VPNv6, not sure
there is any bug inside or not, SE told me just use the
26 matches
Mail list logo
