> On Apr 25, 2017, at 12:36 PM, Gert Doering <g...@greenie.muc.de> wrote: > > Now the interesting question is, of course, *which* NCS code... as there > seem to be a number of different "NCS*" families. > > An ASR920-style device with IOS XR on it, and actually doing all the > nice XR things, I'd love to see that. Even if software upgrades would > suck.
digging through my notes from the service provider partner vt meeting from last summer: (*) ncs4200 positioned as tdm-to-ethernet conversion box to ease the movement from legacy networks to ethernet (*) not considered a replacement for legacy dacs —- cost per port too high (*) initial market meant to be larger carriers — “ncs” moniker helps with positioning in transport teams (*) initial release will have parity with asr900-series (903/907/920) — including running ios-xe (*) movement towards ios-xr expected sometime within 18 months of platform release; not in “ec” yet (*) module parity between ncs4200 and asr900s at fcs (*) modules may be developed in either platform that may not necessarily be absorbed into the other (think b/u split here) thats all i could find. we’re taking specific interest in this platform — as we’re deploying within several customer networks. q. -- quinn snyder | snyd...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ 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/
