Re: [c-nsp] Internet border router recommendations and experiences

Mark Tinka via cisco-nsp <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.nsp.cisco
Message-ID <[email protected]>

On 2/24/23 11:01, Gert Doering wrote:

> I really do like XR, but the update hassles...  so having an "image based"
> XR ("scp $new_xr.bin router:", "boot system flash $new_xr.bin", "reload")
> would have been really nice.
>
> Now, SMUs and "restart only the affected service" is a great promise, but
> in all our time with the ASR9001, all we've seen is "reboot required"
> or "the SMU is not compatible with using service packs".  So, "just upload
> a new image, and then reload" would have had the same effect, with less
> argueing with the box.

This.

Which I don't mind in the data centre, because it's a few boxes looking 
after tons of traffic.

But in the Metro, where you have 100's - 1000's of boxes, this gets very 
painful, very quickly. That and RPL, despite its flexibility, can get 
rather rowdy in high-touch scenarios like the Metro.

Copy, save, reboot, is very attractive.

This is why we rejected the NCS540.


> Not sure XR64 is better in that regard, no experience - we lost trust in
> Cisco before the question of "successor to the 9001?  something with XR64?"
> arose.

We stopped keeping track.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.