[c-nsp] Opinions about the next 6500/7600

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 12:35:48PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> [ 6500 ]
> Personally, I'm not sad to see it replaced.  

Well, neither am I - but then, I don't really want to buy three different
boxes to replace a single 6500...  (with three different operating systems).

But we're not buying yet - for our bandwidth and port density needs, the 
6500 is still a very good match, and we know most of the quirks by now
(most annoying is "show int acc" counters miscounting IPv6, slowwww CPU,
and lack of per-interface netflow for IPv6).  And I *like* the 6500,
it's just amazingly robust.  We even have a few running Sup2+CatOS,
perfect layer2 edge switch for 100M<->GE-channel aggregation.

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20110205/4a05993c/attachment.pgp>