[c-nsp] ASR920 - Any "outstanding" TAC cases people are working through?

[CiscoNSP List]

Cheers Guys - Have 03.16.02aS on the ones ready for deployment, so fingers crossed, it remains a stable release :)

Thanks for the feedback.

________________________________________
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu>
Sent: Thursday, 26 May 2016 3:35 PM
To: James Jun; CiscoNSP List
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 - Any "outstanding" TAC cases people are working through?

On 26/May/16 06:23, James Jun wrote:

> I believe there is an mpls label-range bug that Mark noted (CSCuy29638) which is outstanding, but that can be worked around by staying out of high label range.

Actually, Cisco normally allocate low-range labels. So this is fine if
the box adjacent to the ASR920 is a Cisco.

Juniper tend to allocate labels in the 300,000 - 400,000+ range. This is
not an issue if the ASR920 is not adjacent to the Juniper. In our case,
all situations where we hit this bug is when the ASR920 is adjacent to a
Juniper. We are not in a position to change the topology to avoid the
adjacency between the ASR920 and a Juniper.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to set a label allocation range in
Junos today, the same way you can on a Cisco. That capability is only
slated for Junos 16.

For us, the workaround is a test image that includes the fix that the BU
built specially for us.

But not to worry, the BU say the fixed image is still on schedule for
release 7th June, this year :-).

>
>
> Thankfully, this bug is also fixed on 03.16.02aS.  920s upgraded to this release appear to be fine so far.

Save for my MPLS label range issue, this release is very stable.

Mark.