nanog mailing list archives
Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000
From: Mark Tinka <mtinka () globaltransit net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:55:37 +0800
On Saturday, January 28, 2012 01:42:54 PM Randy Bush wrote:
my fear is that issu is a very complex hack to cover that it takes a week to boot the turkey. and adding more complexity will not make things better in the long run, probably worse in fact.
True, and also to (well, in theory, anyway) not have to reload the box to launch new images in order to avoid any kind of downtime (even with a fixed boot process). The problem with ISSU is that it requires specific support across specific protocols, features and hardware in the router, which invariably means having to run the latest code that supports the features you feel need ISSU, and/or the latest hardware that meets the ISSU requirements per the vendor (it's like chasing your own tail). Since we schedule all maintenance in a maintenance window anyway (whether it's service-impacting or not), I see no point for ISSU. But to each their own. Mark.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Current thread:
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000, (continued)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Julien Goodwin (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Nick Hilliard (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Vinny Abello (Jan 25)
- RE: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 George Bonser (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Tom Hill (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Vinny Abello (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Tom Hill (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Vinny Abello (Jan 25)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Mark Tinka (Jan 27)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Randy Bush (Jan 27)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Mark Tinka (Jan 27)
- Re: juniper mx80 vs cisco asr 1000 Randy Bush (Jan 27)