[j-nsp] Experience with Junos 15.1 on MX960?

[adamv0025 at netconsultings.com]

Interesting choices one has with modern codes.
So how I see it we now have the old fashioned approach of waiting till the
code gets a critical mass resulting in most bugs to be fixed -then consider
for internal testing and deployment.
Or just go for the latest codes -that promises to catch like 90% of bugs via
new advanced internal testing strategies. 
That kind of shifts the paradigm right?
>From do you want to be the first adopter of a new code, to do you want to be
the first adopter of the vendor's new code testing strategy -and rely on it
to be as good as advertised.

But I agree one can select any code and if you do your rigorous in house
testing to make sure the code works with your hw and features who are we to
say otherwise right?

To your point b) -there's also an option for JSUs -but this platform seem
much less common than SMUs in XR so you might get bugs in JSU framework.

Also latest XR promises to customize the installation so you can cherry pick
only protocols you need hopefully resulting in less regression bugs. 

adam    

netconsultings.com
::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry::

> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf
> Of Saku Ytti
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:47 AM
> To: Karl Gerhard
> Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Experience with Junos 15.1 on MX960?
> 
> Hey,
> 
> Personally my strategy with software has always been:
> 
> a) start with latest long term release
> b) if you need bug fixes, update to rebuilds
> c) if you need new features, update to latest long term release
> 
> I don't think software is like wine, I don't think it gets better as it
ages. And
> Juniper has done lot of good work on quality which only applies to late
> releases.
> 
> 15.1 will be EOL in under half a year. Just for support you want at least
16.1,
> but then why not jump straight to 17.3?
> 
> What ultimately makes you experience positive or negative can be behind
> complex set of variables which poorly translates to other networks. Rarely
> there is some vintage release number which is universally good or
universally
> bad.
> 
> I'd start testing 17.3 and go from there.
> 
> 
> On 12 December 2017 at 11:52, Karl Gerhard <karl_gerh at gmx.at> wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > we've had very bad experience with Junos 15.1 on our switches (EX4550,
> EX4300, EX4200).
> > Now we're getting new MX960s with 2xRE-S-X6-64G and unfortunately the
> minimum required Junos version for this RE is 15.1. Can anyone share their
> experience with Junos 15.1 on MX960? Is it as bad as it is on the
switches?
> Would it be wiser to jump directly to 16.1/16.2/17.1/17.2/17.3?
> >
> > We're especially interested in bugs/problems related to MC-LAG.
> >
> > Regards
> > Karl
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> 
> 
> 
> --
>   ++ytti
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp