[j-nsp] SRX3400/3600 Stabie Code Recommendations?

[Scott T. Cameron]

Datacenter 1:
SRX3400 chassis cluster config
10.2R1
/config/juniper.conf.gz = 11811 bytes
2 BGP sessions

= Runs no problem.

Datacenter 2:
SRX3400 chassis cluster config
10.2R1
/config/juniper.conf.gz = 18251 bytes
1 BGP session

= DISASTER

JTAC was very slow in trying to help with the disaster.  Basically, the
firewall would crash several times per day, and I gave up before JTAC even
asked for something beyond request support information.

Datacenter 2 is back running 10.0R3 with no problems.  It lacks V6, but is
quite stable.

Moral of this story:  YMMV.  And don't expect a quick, or even helpful,
response from JTAC.

Scott

On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Clarke Morledge <chmorl at wm.edu> wrote:

> There have been a number of views expressed recently on the list regarding
> the SRX and Junos code buggines and instability.  I am wondering if a lot of
> the issues are related to specific platforms.  Specifically, I am curious to
> know about the reliability of some of the smaller data center models, namely
> the 3400 and 3600.  Are there any stable code recommendations to make
> regarding these data center platforms?  Are there any particularly
> noteworthy code revs that one should stay away from?
>
> I tested the 3400 with flavors of 10.0 for an evaluation recently and it
> performed pretty well, but I did not bang on it as much as I wanted.
>
> I find it interesting to say the least that Juniper officially does not
> recommend (or even make available for the lower end) the latest 10.2R1 for
> any of their SRX products, including the higher end models.  And it has been
> two months now and no maintenance release.
>
> Clarke Morledge
> College of William and Mary
> Information Technology - Network Engineering
> Jones Hall (Room 18)
> Williamsburg VA 23187
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>