On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 07:54 +0100, Andrew Barclay [ISS] wrote:
> We're looking to move to SXJ1, principally to support the ES+ line
> cards on 6500s. IPv4 (+multicast), IPv6, BGP.
This made me look a little more closely at SXJ1. I can see that MPLS LDP
IGP Sync support has arrived. Much to my dism
oward Leadmon
Sent: 24 August 2011 04:50
To: 'Phil Mayers'; 'ML'; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SXJ - The good, the bad, the ugly?
Running SXJ1 here as well, and knock on wood, so far, so good.. IPv4,
IPv6, and BGP all currently in use..
---
Howard Leadmon
, 2011 1:01 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SXJ - The good, the bad, the ugly?
On 08/22/2011 11:49 AM, chiel wrote:
> I see that there is a SXJ1 available, is anybody running this version
> successfully in production (with BGP and IPv6)? Or should i stick to
> SXI
On 08/22/2011 11:49 AM, chiel wrote:
I see that there is a SXJ1 available, is anybody running this version
successfully in production (with BGP and IPv6)? Or should i stick to
SXI7 for now?
We've moved to SXJ1. It seems a solid release.
___
cisco-nsp
Hi,
> I'll probably give it a try in our lab, but I like to let new release
> trains bake for a while before I start putting them in production.
well, we're moving a couple of sup720 to SXJ1 for the WISM-2 - so
we'll see what happens (ISIS/BGP/IPv6 are all present here)
alan
___
sp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SXJ - The good, the bad, the ugly?
Hi,
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 09:32:32AM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
Does this mean they gave up on modular classic IOS?
Seems like it. But given how pathetic that effort was - no buy-in from any
other BUs, thus quite lim
inal Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:10 AM
> To: Seth Mattinen
> Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SXJ - The good, the bad, the ugly?
>
ing.
Mack
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:10 AM
To: Seth Mattinen
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SXJ - The good, the bad, the ugly?
Hi,
On Tue, M
Hi,
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 09:32:32AM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> Does this mean they gave up on modular classic IOS?
Seems like it. But given how pathetic that effort was - no buy-in from
any other BUs, thus quite limited resources for development, and thus no
effective modularity at all, ex
On 03/05/2011 17:32, Seth Mattinen wrote:
Does this mean they gave up on modular classic IOS?
Looks like it.
I remember my cisco account manager in 1998 promising me modular IOS by
12.0 at the latest, as - nodded sagely during the meeting - we agreed that
things had just become unsustainable
On 5/3/2011 05:23, krunal shah wrote:
> From Release notes
>
> Release 12.2(33)SXJ and later releases do not support Cisco IOS Software
> Modularity. With redundant supervisor engines, eFSU upgrade from a Cisco IOS
> Software Modularity image to a Release 12.2(33)SXJ image might result in a
> sign
CSCsw63003 is indeed not fixed in SXJ yet, however it's fixed in SXI6.
Andras
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On May 3, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Brandon Ewing wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 08:48:23AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
>>> There is a memory leak that is not fixed if
On May 3, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Brandon Ewing wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 08:48:23AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
>> There is a memory leak that is not fixed if you run BGP.
>>
>> Jared Mauch
>>
>
> Is this the same one that was present earlier in the SXI releases, where a
> neighbor in Idle or
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 08:48:23AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
> There is a memory leak that is not fixed if you run BGP.
>
> Jared Mauch
>
Is this the same one that was present earlier in the SXI releases, where a
neighbor in Idle or Active states leaks memory? I thought they had that
fixed aro
There is a memory leak that is not fixed if you run BGP.
Jared Mauch
On May 3, 2011, at 8:23 AM, krunal shah wrote:
>> From Release notes
>
> Release 12.2(33)SXJ and later releases do not support Cisco IOS Software
> Modularity. With redundant supervisor engines, eFSU upgrade from a Cisco IOS
>From Release notes
Release 12.2(33)SXJ and later releases do not support Cisco IOS Software
Modularity. With redundant supervisor engines, eFSU upgrade from a Cisco IOS
Software Modularity image to a Release 12.2(33)SXJ image might result in a
significant delay before the switch becomes active; t
SXJ appears to have been in the wild for about month. Has anyone been
playing with it? Seen any nasty bugs yet?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net
17 matches
Mail list logo
