[c-nsp] Sup720, SXH or SXF?

[Peter Taphouse]

matthew zeier wrote:
> Upgrading a couple 6503s from Sup32s to Sup720-3BXLs.  TAC is
> recommending one of the following images:
> 
> -- s72033-adventerprisek9_wan-mz.122-33.SXH3a.bin
> -- s72033-adventerprisek9_wan-mz.122-18.SXF15.bin
> 
> When asked what the difference was, the best I got back was:
> 
>> Their only main difference is on the naming convention for IOS. SXF15 is
>> the latest on the SXF train where the patches and sotware fixed for
>> documented bugs were integrated while SHX3a is the latest on the SXH
>> train. The new name designed our development Engineers for new code
> train.
> 
> Any recommendations on which train I should be on?  The Sup32s are
> running SXF5.

I'd stick with the SXF that you know and love, if it works on the sup32
chances are it'll go fine on the older sup720.  We ran SXF9 for >1 year
without a reload, but on purchasing a couple more 6500/7600s decided to
move to SXH for some features that we thought were nice, but weren't
absolutely necessary. This yielded the following ios path over couple of
 months:

* SXH2a looked good, but had every week or two a router would
spontaeously reload.  Was due to a load of netflow bugs which were fixed
in...
* SXH3 fixed the netflow bug, but introduced a bgp ghosting bug (as
mentioned previously on this thread) , so to the safe haven of...
* SXF15 which has a bug in BFD that caused a router to reload when it
detects a link flap, turning a sub-second blip into a 10 minute brown
out whilst the router reloaded.

We're now still running SXF15, and we've not had any problems since we
disabled bfd everywhere.

Unless you *need* the SXH features, stick with an IOS you know works for
what you do.

Cheers,

-- 
Peter Taphouse

Bytemark Hosting
http://www.bytemark-hosting.co.uk
tel. +44 (0) 845 004 3 004