Article View: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Article #1908Re: How reliable are 9.1 sub-releases ?
From: Peter Radig
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 20:22
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 20:22
24 lines
1450 bytes
1450 bytes
In <C0G3J1.4sv@ecmwf.co.uk> syj@ecmwf.co.uk (Jean-Philippe Martin-Flatin) writes: >How reliable are 9.1 sub-releases ? We are currently hesitating between >the following to upgrade all our CISCOs: > 9.0(3.x) > 9.1(1.x) > 9.1(2.1) >Each of them fixes some bugs we suffer from. But the whole 9.1 release >has had a bad reputation so far, and our distributor seems quite afraid >to let us go beyond 9.0(3) ! Does anybody have some experience with these >sub-releases ? Positive or negative ? >The protocols we are interested in are IP, ARP, RARP, Decnet and Novell. Novell fast switching of small pakets is broken in 9.1(1.?) (BugID 8547). That makes Novell routing only usable if you put "no novell route-cache" into your config. This should be fixed in 9.1(2.x) but I didn't get my hands on it right now. cu, Peter
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<C0LsLA.ICI@orfeo.radig.de>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!yale.edu!ira.uka.de!Germany.EU.net!incom!orfeo!peterReferences:
<C0G3J1.4sv@ecmwf.co.uk>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!yale.edu!ira.uka.de!Germany.EU.net!incom!orfeo!peter From: Peter Radig <peter@orfeo.rhein-main.de> Subject: Re: How reliable are 9.1 sub-releases ? Message-ID: <C0LsLA.ICI@orfeo.radig.de> Phone: +49 69 746972 Sender: peter@orfeo.radig.de (Peter Radig) Address: Palmengartenstr. 1, D-W6000 Frankfurt am Main 1, Germany Organization: Peter Radig EDV-Beratung, Frankfurt am Main, Germany References: <C0G3J1.4sv@ecmwf.co.uk> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 20:22:21 GMT Fax: +49 69 7411443 Lines: 24