[cisco-voip] how long to let expressway updates bake

[Ryan Huff]

I'd personally say anything 8.8+ is good 2 go and it's mostly still just the Jabber stuff that doesn't work over MRA (which is documented).

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 17, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Tim Frazee <tfrazee at gmail.com<mailto:tfrazee at gmail.com>> wrote:

When I say "sit" would be how long do I let other Cisco customers find any serious issues before I would hop on. Wait for the "a" revision to drop. was typical back in the day. not sure if expressway had the same history.

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>> wrote:
Not sure what you're referring to by "sit"? Are you referring to a hardware burn-in of the host chassis the guest VM is running on?

During the non-production period, is the business using it to validate its configuration and usability for its specified business case? Usually, once UAT (User Acceptance Testing) is completed and signed off on I would kick it in to production during a scheduled window.

For chassis burn-in, I like to see a week in the production racks.

Thanks,

-Ryan

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 17, 2017, at 10:32 AM, Tim Frazee <tfrazee at gmail.com<mailto:tfrazee at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> new to the expressway suite and was wondering whats the average wait time (if any) for new versions of expressway to sit before you consider them production worthy.
>
> for ucm/cup/cuc, I usually give it no more than a month before I would consider it "stable" but was interested in what this group tends to lean to.
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20170717/17e49312/attachment.html>