[c-nsp] policer on ASR1001X

[Łukasz Bromirski]

Mark,

I’m from a different BU, but overall - yes, I remember some of the discussions we’ve had in the past. I’m very sorry it turned out this way.

Unfortunately, some of the decisions are not made on single-platform level, and I do get you’re frustrated because either there’s no one to talk to, answers are not satisfactory or there’s simply black hole - no answers.

Just for everyone to know - SP team changed the way they process feature requests from Customers and Account Teams. Tools by themselves won’t solve any problem, but right now it should be much easier to track all of the requests received across the board. If you, like Mike, are frustrated with the suggestions or requests falling to „deaf ears”, please try once again. 

And hey - solid competition is what can move us all forward :)

-- 
./

> On 10 Sep 2021, at 18:16, Mark Tinka <mark at tinka.africa> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 9/10/21 17:50, Lukasz Bromirski wrote:
>> 
>> IOS-XE is here to stay :) Indeed, there’s “dumbed down” version of it for SD-WAN, and they’re being slowly unified with normal IOS-XE being adopted to work in “centralized” (vs “autonomous”) mode. That’s not “autonomous” like with the Autonomic Networking feature from some years back, it’s “normal” IOS-XE.
>> 
>> From hardware perspective, yes, UADP (Catalyst/switches) and QFP (Catalyst/ASR/routers) can handle a lot of fancy QoS duties, and doing pps/bps at the same time would be just enhancement. PPS limit for normal traffic seems to be less popular as Customers usually care more about bandwidth/throughput than PPS, while PPS is *very* important and more applicable for Control-Plane protection duties, as all processing is PPS-bound obviously.
>> 
>> @James - please reach out to your account team to request such feature.
> 
> Thanks, Lukasz.
> 
> But with respect, this is one of the reasons I am changing all our gear over to Juniper. The messaging from Cisco depends on who you speak to, and when. Last year with our AM team was horrible, trying to get features into the ASR920, and being told that the NCS540 is where all focus is going; so, sorry!
> 
> This may or may not have been true last year. This may or may not be true this year. But I can't build a business on this uncertainty.
> 
> I'm not moaning at you, just to be clear :-).
> 
> Mark.