[c-nsp] ME3600 migration to something with more 10 gig ports

[James Bensley]

On 14 July 2015 at 12:06, Adam Vitkovsky <Adam.Vitkovsky at gamma.co.uk> wrote:
> But it makes perfect sense to me
> Why would they waste resources/money when they know we do throughout testing ourselves anyways (no matter how good they testing might have been).

Yeah I totally get that dude, but....

On 14 July 2015 at 13:27, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
> On 14/07/2015 11:35, James Bensley wrote:
>> Much as I love this box and the ME3600s as I've said in another
>> thread, Cisco's testing is utter shite. Like the ME3600 pseudowires
>> coming up but not forwarding any traffic, how did they not testing
>> that?!!!
>
> not as bad as carrier loss on a port-based pseudowire causing the box to
> crash and reboot.  That one caused a couple of raised eyebrows, for sure.

This...

If we fail to pick it up in soak testing and we discover the issue on
the live network I'm not happy, the customer isn't happy, the business
execs aren't happy, shareholders aren't happy, new papers are
happy...Cisco should be heavily testing every software and hardware
relase.

On 14 July 2015 at 12:06, Adam Vitkovsky <Adam.Vitkovsky at gamma.co.uk> wrote:
>  The live audience makes sure they only need to deal with the widely used features and not waste money on fixing features that almost no one actually uses.

Sure. So when some other vendors I have my eye on reach a level I'm
happy with, I'll be going to them instead, that is why.

My loyalty is Cisco is mediocre at best if they can't perform basic
soak tests, can't resolve my TAC cases in a timely manner, or behave
when we open a case for an interoperability issue instead of just
blindly blaming the other vendor, why stay with them?

They offer hardware with roughly the right features at roughly the
right price point. They don't offer much beyond that (for me).

James.