nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP Experiment
From: "Jakob Heitz \(jheitz\) via NANOG" <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:13:44 +0000
It does, Ytti. And not just in testing. In feature development too. Often in design discussions, someone pipes up: "someone does bla bla, Let's not break it". One I remember from years ago was setting two route reflectors as clients of each other and thinking route reflection wasn't designed for that. It's being aware of such customer "creativity" that keeps us on our toes. Regards, Jakob. -----Original Message----- From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi> Lot of vendor, maybe all, accept your configuration and test them for releases. I think this is only viable solution vendors have for blackbox, gather configs from customers and test those, instead of try to guess what to test. I've done that with Cisco in two companies, unfortunately I can't really tell if it impacted quality, but I like to think it did. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- Re: BGP Experiment, (continued)
- Re: BGP Experiment Owen DeLong (Jan 26)
- Re: BGP Experiment Randy Bush (Jan 26)
- Re: BGP Experiment Eric Kuhnke (Jan 26)
- Re: BGP Experiment Nick Hilliard (Jan 26)
- Re: BGP Experiment Randy Bush (Jan 26)
- Re: BGP Experiment William Allen Simpson (Jan 27)
- [2019/01/27] Re: BGP Experiment Hansen, Christoffer (Jan 27)
- Re: BGP Experiment Randy Bush (Jan 27)
- Re: BGP Experiment Nick Hilliard (Jan 27)
- Re: BGP Experiment Brian Kantor (Jan 28)