[c-nsp] IOS XR 4.3.0 or 4.3.1

[Jared Mauch]

On May 23, 2013, at 8:36 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se> wrote:

> On Thu, 23 May 2013, Jared Mauch wrote:
> 
>> So everyone waits and nobody reports a bug for the first 6 months?
> 
> Obviously not.

That seems to be what the SE in the (now trimmed reference) was suggesting.  I understand not everyone has lab/test hardware, but if that's the case how can you ever upgrade anything without risk.  At some point you need to make that jump.

>> I summarily reject your irrational fears of "new" software. Software is imperfect in all cases.
> 
> It seems more imperfect shortly after release than after a while.

I think the question of what that unit of measure you apply.  If you want to wait until X bugs are fixed, I can certainly understand where x(sub)1 for my network may not be the same as x(sub)2 for yours.  Is there a specific metric for number of defects you use, or is it just some time-based SWAG?  Without the vendor getting feedback that their software is good (or bad), they are left with an unknown outcome for their software release.

>> I have specific defects that are keeping me from 4.3.1, these also exist in 4.2.3. Are you hitting the same bugs? I don't know.
> 
> Me neither. I get very upset when they say that they won't fix things in 4.2.3 (which is supposedly a long-term support release) and they usually fix it. I take for granted that I'm not the only upset one.

I'm can get very frustrated with Cisco on these topics.  We went a round with them on 4.2.2 as we depended on that release for specific hardware.  They didn't want to support it.  If that's the case, there was no point of the release at all, why even ship that release?  (can you feel my frustration? :-)
> 
>> But rejecting something with loads of bug fixes and architecture changes to fix the whole every smu is a reload one because of a calendar without defects is irrational and illogical.
> 
> I don't really understand what you're trying to say here.
> 
> Anyhow, I apply the same logic here as I do in IOS-land. You start to get on 12.0(32)SYx when X is above 3 or 4. Same with SRE for 7600, SRE4-5 or so started to be ok.
> 
> Cisco is not alone in this, I'd say most vendors have similar problems.

Yes, Juniper had a major problem in the 10.x days where the software didn't become stable after long periods of time.  They changed their software release strategy as a result.  You can see that because releases no longer stop at "R4" anymore.

- Jared