[nsp] dot1q causes port error?

[Gert Doering]

hi,

On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:03:35PM +0000, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
>  12.0S is appealling to me in view of all these 12.2 bugs but its a while since
> i used them..

Mostly they're pretty good.  IPv6 is lacking on 7200/7500.  Some versions
have really weird counter bugs.

> You've listed a few below - 12.0(21)S5, 12.0(18)S1.. 12.2(12a)
> 
> In your current experience which is the most stable?

Uh.  I'm running 12.0(21)S5 on exactly one box for about a week now, and
it has been "stable" - with no nasty surprises and no counter bugs yet :-)

12.0(16)S1 is running on one box since "1 year, 29 weeks", but it has
counter bugs, SNMP remote crashes, and what not.

12.0(13.5)S is running since "2 years, 2 weeks" on yet another box, 
but it also has counter bugs, SNMP remote crashes, and so on.

(Obviously the SNMP crashes can be prevented by access lists, and the
counter bugs are not enough of a nuisance to get the machines upgraded).

Due to the interface counter nasties and the SNMP bugs I'd recommend to
go for 12.0(21)S5 - but I can't say for sure (yet) that it's stable enough 
to get a year's uptime :-)

> Btw are you running dot1q or DEC21140 FE ?

Dot1q only on a box with 12.2(12a), which did crash when I removed the
"bridge-group 1" statement from the native FastE interface...

The machine that's running 12.0(21)S5 has a DEC21140 based PA-FE-TX
and a DEC21140A based C7200-I/O-FE board.  I haven't seen any problems
on those yet (loaded up to maybe 30-35 Mbit/s. peak).

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert.doering@physik.tu-muenchen.de