[c-nsp] Bug ID CSCsv50653

[Jason LeBlanc]

Is 12.2(46)SE6 the recommended most stable version then since it was the last supported version?

On Jan 6, 2010, at 3:47 PM, Hector Herrera wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Jeff Kell <jeff-kell at utc.edu> wrote:
>> On 1/6/2010 4:55 PM, Jason Shearer wrote:
>>> After reload, 3550 does not load share
>>> 
>>> 1st Found-In
>>> 12.2(35)SE
>>> Known Affected Versions
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Fixed-In
>>> 12.2(50)SE
>>> 12.2(50)SE1
>>> 
>> 
>> Well, that's a major crock-o-stuff, as 12.2(46)SE6 is the last
>> officially supported/provided IOS release for that platform (other than
>> the DC version).
>> 
>> Jeff
> 
> Yes, that is quite ugly.  I'm currently using 12.2(50)SE3 on a
> 3550-12T and the only difficulties that I have run into is a high (
>> 90% cpu load when total throughput on the load-balanced links reaches
> 200 Mbps ).
> 
> I am curious to find out if the high cpu load is caused by some
> incompatibility between 12.2(50)SE3 and the 3550-12T (since the
> version is not officially supported on the platform).  However, this
> bug (no load sharing after reload) is making me think twice about
> testing 12.2(46)SE6.
> 
> On the other hand, the bug fix for this issue could be the reason for
> the high cpu load ....
> 
> Out of curiosity, is anybody here using a 3550 to route more than
> 200Mbps ( at about 40,000 packets per second forwarding rate ), I
> would be interested in comparing cpu loads with or without
> load-sharing.
> 
> Thank you for all the copies of the bug that I received (both to the
> list and privately).
> 
> -- 
> Hector Herrera
> _______________________________________________
> 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/