On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, James Bensley wrote:
My mind is pretty set on this, their testing has been appalling (I’m obviously moaning at Cisco about this) – I’d like to know what others think.
Back in the late 00:s XR for the CRS was rock solid (as long as you managed to get the thing up and running), especially if you ran without a lot of new features. Basic LDP+MPLS+ISIS+BGP just worked for years without issue. I believe this was a factor of fairly low number of features and fairly high price for the platform, so Cisco could pay for proper testing of the features they offered.
Now, everybody wants all kinds of features, the feature velocity has been extremely high for the past 5-8 years, and at the same time people don't really want to pay much. Thus, you get more features that are less tested, because testing them is complex, and yet I'm sure there is less money for testing.
Of course Cisco could do a better job here, but one also has to recognise the market condition our vendors are acting in.
At least it's my experience that even though there was a shared code-base between ASR9k and CRS, XR worked a lot better on CRS. My guess is that this was due to level of testing and that they were in different BUs back then.
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se _______________________________________________ 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/
