[c-nsp] ARP requests

[Łukasz Bromirski]

Gert,

> On 19 Aug 2020, at 18:29, Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 06:23:36PM +0200, ??ukasz Bromirski wrote:
>> Working with TAC would be probably best option going forward.
> 
> I find your optimism amazing.

Maybe that’s because I work for Cisco? :)

> (My TAC case about "ASR920 do not always honour IPv4 ACLs on SVIs"
> is not getting anywhere since December.  We managed to reproduce the
> issue in the TAC lab around April...)

I’ll follow up with you offline on that, while that’s not exact name of the case, I found it ;)

> It might give some sort of satisfaction if a TAC case eventually comes
> to a conclusion different from "works as designed" or "the effect is
> gone after reboot" or "have you tried upgrading to the latest version?"
> (and then "gone after reboot") but for ongoing operational problems,
> we have been less than underwhelmed with TAC performance.

Unfortunately, everything comes down to proper escalation. While Cisco TAC is still biggest technical support organization, unmatched by other networking vendors, people are working on a number of cases. Priorities/Severities matter.

P1 - my network is down
P2 - my network functioning is severly degraded
P3 - I have a problem which is interesting
P4 - I have a question

I’d keep such request at least at P2 at all times. Even if TAC is waiting to schedule internal lab recreation or cooperation with platform developers to verify behavior.

Anyway, yeah - I’m actually pessimist and cynic, but enough about me ;)

-- 
Łukasz Bromirski / https://lukasz.bromirski.net
CCIE R&S/SP #15929, CCDE #2012::17, PGP Key ID: 0xFD077F6A