On 8 March 2016 at 11:02, Adam Vitkovsky <adam.vitkov...@gamma.co.uk> wrote: > Well this sounds like a perfect example of a regression bug, when fix of one > thing introduces another bug, > That's why I like to cherry pick SMUs related only to what I truly need to > fix. > If the SP has a fix for e.g. BGP EVPN and I'm not using EVPN, then I'd rather > omit that -because it can introduce bug in something that I actually do care > about.
And here lies the fallacy, the SMU looks like it's addressing just single DDTS, but it's not. Imagine if that was the case. Imagine there is bgpd which has bugs DDTS1, 2 and 3. How many permutations we can get from these three bugs? Dunno the math, but it's lot, I think 15 permutations with just 3 bugs. And of course if bgpd gets 4th bug the amount of permutations explodes. This is clearly not how it works, when you pick up that fix for DDTS3 you're getting new bgpd version which has fixes for DDTS2 and DDTS1 also. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ 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/
