Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (ASCEND) Virtual IP routing / IP Navigator

On Fri, 31 Jul 1998, Matt Holdrege wrote:

> As for the rest of your complaints, the GRF is working just fine in some
> networks, and yes it has had problems in others like yours. It is clearly a
> niche router. 

As long as you're not using BGP, dynamic routing protocols, or ATM under
a 1.4.x release.

We finally had to downgrade our GRF to 1.3.11.5, and so far, that seems
to have killed our ATM problems (thanks, Willie!).  We're lucky enough
to not have to run BGP and can rely on static routing for the immediate
future.

"Core router" and "niche router" are two mutually exclusive terms, and I
think it would be in Ascend's best interests to acknowledge the fact
that the GRF still has some major issues that currently prevent it from 
being a viable solution for its intended market.

Apparently, though, to give you credit, the development on the GRF is
realizing this and the next 1.4 release, from what I've heard, isn't
adding any new features so that they can concentrate on fixing bugs.
I've also heard that the testing procedures are changing so that they
can be more assured of actually fixing in-the-field problems.  The GRF
group *is*, from what it looks like, trying to do The Right Thing.

Too bad we can't get that same sort of response for the MAX line.  This
is precisely what needs to be done for the immediate future -- stop
shoehorning new stuff in until existing stuff works properly.

Don't get me wrong, Matt -- I like our GRF, despite the problems we've
had with it.  But when we've had over 20 hours of actual downtime all
directly attributable to that router, within 2 months of bringing it
online, you can't tell me it's solid yet.

I've got hopes for 1.3.11, because I'm not looking forward to having to
go forward with finding a replacement router.  The design of the GRF
*is* way ahead of Cisco -- I'm not familiar with Bay Networks, so I
can't comment there -- but the software and hardware bugs make that a
moot point if it isn't reliable.
 
> Ascend
> native frame relay and ATM is clearly the best and we can prove it. In fact
> we do prove it on a daily basis to all the carriers who end up buying our
> switches.

What do you mean by "native frame relay and ATM"?  Native ATM
implementation on the GRF still has a lot of work that needs to be done,
or so I've been told by the boys in Alameda...

-- 
Devin L. Ganger <devin@premier1.net>
Chief Systems Administrator, Premier1 Internet Services, Sultan, WA, USA
     "Give me five Novaks, and _they_ could rule the world."
     -- Alistair J. R. Young

++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups: References: