[F10-nsp] Re: force10-nsp Digest, Vol 6, Issue 8

Thu Feb 16 12:45:23 EST 2006

According to Force10 ver 2.3.1 should be out next week for the S50. Im 
really excited about this cause it is supposed to be a major upgrade to 
the CLI. I have had the 2 S50s on my desk for testing the past few days 
and Im quite impressed from a hardware standpoint. The stacking on these 
box's is pretty amazing and so far it has been a much better experience 
than from Cisco Catalyst switches. My only complaint would be the CLI 
which is not even close to FTOS for the E series. Anyone else have any 
other thoughts?

Currently I have only layer 2 enabled OS, has anyone used these with 
Layer 3 enabled and what is your opinion on it?

force10-nsp-request at puck.nether.net wrote:

>Send force10-nsp mailing list submissions to
>	force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/force10-nsp
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	force10-nsp-request at puck.nether.net
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	force10-nsp-owner at puck.nether.net
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of force10-nsp digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. S50s (David Diaz)
>   2. Re: S50s (Panny Malialis)
>   3. Re: S50s (David Diaz)
>   4. Re: S50s (Andy Myers)
>   5. Re: S50s (David Diaz)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 21:37:20 -0500
>From: David Diaz <davediaz.tech at gmail.com>
>Subject: [F10-nsp] S50s
>To: force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>Message-ID:
>	<f31b5e0b0602151837o41430bb1v66a0b5470abed577 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>I heard someone was interested in some feedback on the S50s. I have
>been administrating a network of them and so far so good.  I am about
>to try upgrading to the latest code in a week.
>
>Dave
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 02:46:07 +0000
>From: Panny Malialis <panny at hotlinks.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: [F10-nsp] S50s
>To: David Diaz <davediaz.tech at gmail.com>
>Cc: force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>Message-ID: <43F3E76F.6020400 at hotlinks.co.uk>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Yes, I'm particularly looking forward to the changes to the vlan config 
>in the new version.
>
>No problems for us so far apart from 1 port on a 10GE card DOA which was 
>replaced for us in lightning speed.
>
>Panny
>
>David Diaz wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I heard someone was interested in some feedback on the S50s. I have
>>been administrating a network of them and so far so good.  I am about
>>to try upgrading to the latest code in a week.
>>
>>Dave
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>force10-nsp mailing list
>>force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/force10-nsp
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:04:56 -0500
>From: David Diaz <davediaz.tech at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [F10-nsp] S50s
>To: Panny Malialis <panny at hotlinks.co.uk>
>Cc: force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>Message-ID:
>	<f31b5e0b0602151904x3cd1f18fwafc43d6e727fcdb3 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>I saw a minor MTU problem on the LAGs but besides that it has be rock
>solid and I also found the support very good.
>
>On 2/15/06, Panny Malialis <panny at hotlinks.co.uk> wrote:
>  
>
>>Yes, I'm particularly looking forward to the changes to the vlan config
>>in the new version.
>>
>>No problems for us so far apart from 1 port on a 10GE card DOA which was
>>replaced for us in lightning speed.
>>
>>Panny
>>
>>David Diaz wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I heard someone was interested in some feedback on the S50s. I have
>>>been administrating a network of them and so far so good.  I am about
>>>to try upgrading to the latest code in a week.
>>>
>>>Dave
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>force10-nsp mailing list
>>>force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/force10-nsp
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:52:04 -0500
>From: Andy Myers <acm at dullroar.org>
>Subject: Re: [F10-nsp] S50s
>To: David Diaz <davediaz.tech at gmail.com>
>Cc: force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>Message-ID: <1140097924.11232.15.camel at ti63>
>Content-Type: text/plain
>
>On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 22:04 -0500, David Diaz wrote:
>  
>
>>I saw a minor MTU problem on the LAGs but besides that it has be rock
>>solid and I also found the support very good.
>>    
>>
>
>Hi, I think I was the one who was originally asking about S50
>experience...  We're planning to use LAGs too, so could you elaborate
>about what went wrong and how you fixed it?
>
>Thanks,
>Andy
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:20:21 -0500
>From: David Diaz <davediaz.tech at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [F10-nsp] S50s
>To: Andy Myers <acm at dullroar.org>
>Cc: force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>Message-ID:
>	<f31b5e0b0602160620r6bb05f92re3062c992b355420 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>ok there was a known issue with 2.1.5 (old code). On the backside XFPs
>(i think it was local to those) I created a LAG.  If packets were sent
>through on the front side gig ports at the max size, and u did blan
>tagging and sent them over the lag (I think 4bits were added) the
>packets would be dropped.  It was a very specific problem and it took
>all of about 15secs to adjust the max MTU size allowed on the lag.  I
>believe adding a tag put another 4bits on and that pushed it over the
>default limit in some cases.
>
>2.1.6 corrected the limit be default. That is the single only problem
>I have run into and that was because I was an early adopter.  The
>boxes have been hammered on and have stood up just fine.  I am soon to
>try 2.2.1. I know the CLI syntax has changed a lot.
>
>As for crashes, reboots, phantom MAC addressing etc showing up, zip,
>and this has been an issue with other vendors. I would compare force10
>to juniper but just in the ethernet space.
>
>It would be interesting to see if anyone has stacked 8 units and
>banged on all 384 ports to see what kinda stats they produced.
>
>Oh the important issue with the bug, TAC verified and diagnosed it in
>about 10 seconds.  We came up with a solution immediately that would
>require no interruption of services... non reboot.
>
>dave
>
>
>
>On 2/16/06, Andy Myers <acm at dullroar.org> wrote:
>  
>
>>On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 22:04 -0500, David Diaz wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I saw a minor MTU problem on the LAGs but besides that it has be rock
>>>solid and I also found the support very good.
>>>      
>>>
>>Hi, I think I was the one who was originally asking about S50
>>experience...  We're planning to use LAGs too, so could you elaborate
>>about what went wrong and how you fixed it?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>force10-nsp mailing list
>force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/force10-nsp
>
>
>End of force10-nsp Digest, Vol 6, Issue 8
>*****************************************
>  
>