[c-nsp] Cosmetic bug or unsupported NPE?

[Saku Ytti]

On (2007-02-08 13:23 -0800), Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
 
> The point is that not everyone running bgp on an NPE300 needs the additional
> features in the service provider feature set.  Just because you do does not
> mean that everyone else does.  So your FOS and just spreading FUD if you are
> claiming that
> NPE300 and NPE225 is going to be useless for full view bgp for everybody in
> a short time due to

I'm sorry if I was being ambiguous:
---
I run NPE300 with 12.2(25)S extensively. With 256MB + two full views I'd
recommend not to do, unless you have extremely small iBGP and no VRF.
But even with tiny iBGP and no VRF it's race against time you'll soon
loose, so start planning a design which does not require full table
in NPE300's.
--

Next time I'll try to make that 12.2(25)S point bit more clear by
explicitly stating, not implicitly, that eg. 12.1E will do for now.

Sorry,
-- 
  ++ytti