[c-nsp] 12.2(33)SRA is finally out!

[Jared Mauch]

On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 07:27:15PM +0200, Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:
> > Rather I think you'll see two trains, which both will run in
> > both chassi.
> 
> There's were rumors that the two trains would only run on their respective
> platform. IMO that would be totally idiotic, and I guess there are far too
> many of 'the wrong kind' in production out there for that to make any sense.
> 
> However, for SRA they're actually saying that (just) the 7600 is supported,
> though then adding: "Although Cisco IOS Release 12.2(33)SRA is intended to
> run on Cisco 7600 series routers, you can run this release on Cisco Catalyst
> 6500 series switches. Before you do so, ensure that the hardware components
> and the software features that you require are compatible."
> 
> I'm sure the message will be the reverse for Whitney (the Enterprise
> counterpart).
> 
> Quite a lot of the 6500 modules (especially service modules) are not
> supported in SRA and I suspect that there'll be more of that in the future.
> 
> Why dev-test PFC3A for SRA? In fact, why dev-test inline power stuff? Or a
> CallManager module? And why dev-test a DPT SIP/SPA for Whitney? I'm sure
> it'll be just like the features, a matter of prioritization of dev-test
> resources.

	Because the BU wars about this shared hardware cause
some SP folks to look at Whitney for a modular software release since
they can't afford to have their box crash and take forever doing
a POST.

> > Reasons for the split, from my point of view are not marketing
> > reason to differentiate the chassi, but probably more about
> > fundamental changes to the architecture
> 
> It sounded like a good idea back when the enterprise (12.1 E) and service
> provider (12.0 S) trains were integrated on the 6500/7600 (12.2 SX), because
> "it's the same hardware".
> 
> But in fact it caused a lot of pain, because neither group were getting the
> features they needed, when they needed them. (For example, Catalyst 6500,
> "the premium enterprise switch", has an almost laughable 802.1x/IBNS feature
> set).

	Sure, but I would actually argue that this will continue
to cause pain as long as they have this shared platform "76k" (higher
numbers are better, right?) as these teams are doing a lot of
duplicated work.  These costs do show up in your purchase price and
maintence costs.

	- jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared at puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.