[c-nsp] Cosmetic bug or unsupported NPE?

[Saku Ytti]

On (2007-02-08 01:50 -0800), Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> I run 2 NPE300's in 7206VXR's, 2 uplinks and ibgp and getting full table

As Gert already happily explained and perhaps you misread and didn't notice
the difference about 12.2 and 12.2S. Tt's comparing apples to oranges
really, closer comparison would be to 12.1E really.

> EOL on NPE300 is a marketing issue for Cisco it was not made due to 256mb
> being inadequate for the global bgp table.

No one ever claimed it was EOL'd because of 256MB, NPE225 is 256MB also
and still has years of life ahead.

Thank you,
-- 
  ++ytti