Running 6500's and 7200's with 3rd party memory... No issues. On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Gary Dunaway <gary.duna...@teamhgs.com> wrote: > A few years back, we had to do memory upgrades on our ASAs in order to move > to 8.3 code. All was done with 3rd party memory kits. There have been no > performance issues we've noticed with them. The one issue we had was that one > of the memory sticks in the kit was bad. The vendor immediately sent out a > replacement for it and all was well after that. > > -Gary > > > -----Original Message----- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+gary.dunaway=teamhgs....@nanog.org] On > Behalf Of Shawn L > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 11:47 AM > To: nanog > Subject: Experience with Third-Party memory (Cisco)? > > With all the talk lately about the growth in routes, I got to thinking about > upgrading the memory in a couple of my routers. > > Does anyone have experience using third-party "guaranteed compatible" > memory. > > With Cisco's discount it looks like I can upgrade for $5k vs $700 with third > party memory. I'm just wondering if others have used it, and how it's > performed, or if it isn't worth the risk. > > thanks > > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ > > Please make note of our new e-mail domain name: TEAMHGS.COM. > Request you to update your address book accordingly. > > Confidentiality Notice: > The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to > this message are > intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain > confidential or privileged > information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender > at > Hinduja Global Solutions or postmas...@teamhgs.com immediately and destroy > all copies of > this message and any attachments. > > 9284f6a0-bf16-11e3-b1b6-0800200c9a66
-- Regards, Chris Knipe
