RE: [nsp] To S or not to S?

• Next message: Jared Mauch: "Re: [nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Previous message: Dmitri Kalintsev: "Re: [nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Maybe in reply to: Charles Sprickman: "[nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Next in thread: Gert Doering: "Re: [nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

-><rant on>
->
->I would say that 12.0S *used to be* very good. Around
->12.0(17)S/S1. Haven't
->seen a worthy release since then. :( (I'm talking 12K, 7500
->and 7200 here).

<rant continue>

12.0.17ST with RPR+ for the 12K...great feature and part of what became
known as SSO. the only problem was if a few vty's were busy and someone did
a "wr mem", the box reloaded and the config was blown off. 12.0.18S3 has
been stable for us. holding out for 12.0.22S and we'll probably let that
bake for six months before we touch it.

</rant continue>

cheers,

jay

• Next message: Jared Mauch: "Re: [nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Previous message: Dmitri Kalintsev: "Re: [nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Maybe in reply to: Charles Sprickman: "[nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Next in thread: Gert Doering: "Re: [nsp] To S or not to S?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:48 EDT