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 cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
