I don't know if I fully understand why a vendor EOL's a piece of equipment or software version. There are probably various reasons why a vendor chooses to do this. I feel as the customer that just because a vendor thinks something is EOL, doesn't mean I am done using it. Maybe I have a good use for it for the foreseeable future.
Maybe this speaks to the relationship that a vendor and customer enter into in understanding the why, how and when aspects of using their products. Even so, I'm not sure I understand or even agree with all of it. Hope I was on-topic for at least some of the intent of this thread :) -Aaron -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp <[email protected]> On Behalf Of harbor235 Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 2:19 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco life cycle strategy Hello, What is your replacement strategy for Cisco gear reaching EOL milestones? I prefer not to replace at the end of SW maintenance releases but prefer the end of vulnerability/Security support. My assumption is by then all the major bugs and fixes should be remedied/ fixed by then and the software should be stable. Last days for hardware replacement continue through the end of the service contract. I would like to get as much investment protection as possible, not to mention the potential of disruption of infrastructure services thoughts? strategies? 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/
