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

Thu Feb 16 13:27:35 EST 2006

My bad I meant to say 2.3.1
I have not hammered the layer3 extra. Frankly Im always of the
philosophy of letting routers ROUTE and switches SWITCH.  Although
force10 has done an great job of routing on their other series.  I
would not try doing a bunch of full route BGP tables on this box but
that was not what it was made for.

Everyone says the same thing about the CLI. They have gotten it into a
few hands early to get feedback and now have the new CLI coming out.
Everyone is looking forward to it. I am hoping for a smooth transition
but we had some concern about reloading the config. I think that was
only if you are prior to 2.1.5.  Any feedback???

People say it beats cisco but what are people's thoughts comparing
this box to Extreme boxes?

On 2/16/06, keith <keith at pando.com> wrote:
> 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
> >*****************************************
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> force10-nsp mailing list
> force10-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/force10-nsp
>