[c-nsp] Acceptance Test Procedure for New Cisco Devices

Marc Binderberger marc at sniff.de
Tue Jan 20 19:08:41 EST 2009 

Hi Ziv,

> But I guess we'll finally opt for letting the Cisco QA be enough as  
> a guarantee the devices work (there's always RMA) and have Alex's  
> suggestion be the winner here, just be as nebulous as you can and  
> follow the "ill-defined and metaphysical characteristique" of such  
> undefined term as "Acceptance Test Procedure"

Is a hardware failure what the customer is worried about?  You  
mentioned a turn-key solution and as a customer I would be more  
worried about if the solution actually works as expected. The detail  
that you have RMA contracts with Cisco and within what time is only  
part of it. Routers/Firewalls are mostly a software product with all  
the consequences.

Regarding the "ill-defined" - may work. Sometimes it also works to be  
extremely detailed. You describe a test procedure in the very detail,  
so there is no doubt what you have tested and how to reproduce it.  
Doesn't mean the test has to be complicated - even if it's trivial you  
can hide this is many test steps ;-)

E.g. power-cycling a whole setup is a valid test - after an power  
outage you want your solution come back up again.


Regards, Marc




>
> I'd ask the customer:
> Are you married? Did you fill an ATP form before you said "Yes, I  
> do" ??? No??? Then c'mon, gimme a break!!! It's just a darn router  
> we're talking here, not chaining your entire life with the same  
> woman!!
> A router can be replaced when malfunctioning, with a wife it's a bit  
> more difficult, isn't it??
> Thak you all again!
> Ziv
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Balashov [mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 3:38 PM
> To: Ziv Leyes
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Acceptance Test Procedure for New Cisco Devices
>
> But if it's attached to a legal statement, the more nebulous and  
> elastic
> (aka BS) it is the more protection you have from incurring liability  
> for
> actually having done or not done something.
>
> That gets easier when the "acceptance testing process" is ill-defined
> and metaphysical, not harder.
>
> Ziv Leyes wrote:
>
>> Ok, let me be more specific
>> When we buy devices for our own use, we just open it, plug it, and  
>> start using them, if there are any problems, we call the provider  
>> and they fix the problem (RMA or whatever)
>> In this case, we're going to sell the equipment as a kind of turn- 
>> key project, and the customer asked us to provide them with "our"  
>> ATP, which we don't really use for ourselves, so I'd like to  
>> implement one sort of testing procedure from now on for this type  
>> of cases. We're going to attach this to a legal statement so we  
>> can't just type some BS there and that's it, we want to actually  
>> implement it, and if we write we do a,b,c,d then we'll going to do  
>> a,b,c,d procedure for real.
>> I was thinking some of you guys may already use this kind of test  
>> routines and can help me creating one.
>> I don't need some really serious stuff, I can imagine I'll check  
>> the delivery status of the package, open it, check all the contents  
>> that need to be there are there, to plug the device and see it  
>> works, perhaps load some configuration, plug the hardware that is  
>> planned to hold if any (HWICS and so), perform some soft and hard  
>> reboots, see the device responds, there are links on all  
>> interfaces, and pack it back exactly as it was.
>> The problem is I don't know how exactly write it down on a kind of  
>> form that there's a checkbox for each test.
>> Does anybody have some ready to go stuff?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Rathlev [mailto:peter at rathlev.dk]
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 1:31 PM
>> To: Ziv Leyes
>> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Acceptance Test Procedure for New Cisco Devices
>>
>> On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 12:13 +0200, Ziv Leyes wrote:
>>> Could anyone share if possible a kind of basic ATP you may use for  
>>> new
>>> Cisco devices that you may receive?
>>> I'm in need of providing a customer with such procedure for two new
>>> devices, a Cisco 1861 router and a Cisco ASA5510
>>
>> Is it just the hardware that needs to be acceptance tested or is it  
>> some
>> kind of service depending on this hardware? I don't specifically  
>> recall
>> the term "ATP" but I guess Operational Acceptance Testing is the  
>> same.
>>
>> We only supply services, and the acceptance tests are defined by the
>> receiving end, typically with some help from a Service Manager and a
>> network engineer. The tests only check functionality not endurance of
>> the system. Typically the tests check everything defined in the SLA.
>>
>> When receiving hardware we use for ourselves we have no formal
>> acceptance tests; for core equipment it runs in a lab for some time  
>> and
>> the takes on a role as a standby unit in the production net.  
>> Sometimes
>> when time limits dictate it we end up just placing some new  
>> component in
>> an important role without testing. I hope the manufacturer does some
>> kind of burn in test. :-)
>>
>> HTH,
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ************************************************************************************
>> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
>> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &  
>> computer viruses.
>> ************************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ************************************************************************************
>> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
>> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &  
>> computer viruses.
>> ************************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
>
> -- 
> Alex Balashov
> Evariste Systems
> Web    : http://www.evaristesys.com/
> Tel    : (+1) (678) 954-0670
> Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
> Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &  
> computer viruses.
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &  
> computer viruses.
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>

--
Marc Binderberger           <marc at sniff.de>

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list