Mailing List Archive: Cisco: NSP

Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images?

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

pc50000 at gmail

Mar 8, 2010, 7:32 AM

Post #1 of 8 (942 views)
Permalink

Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images?

I'm deploying a Cisco 7200 series router. I've used ISRs in the past many
times, but have never touched any 7200 series (or non-ISR for that matter)
hardware.

Can anyone explain to me the purpose of the 12.2 images I see on CCO for
this device? These images seem to have a different naming and numbering
scheme than that 12.4/15 images. Normally, if this was any ISR I would just
use 12.4T15(latest) as these seem to be the best combination of stability
and necessary features, but I can't find any clear documentation on what the
12.2s are for.

Thanks!
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

asturluismi at gmail

Mar 8, 2010, 7:53 AM

Post #2 of 8 (904 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

my 2 cents
Cisco IOS Software Release 12.2(33)SRC
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps8802/ps6970/ps1838/prod_presentation0900aecd8072c43a.pdf

El lun, 08-03-2010 a las 09:32 -0600, P C escribió:
> I'm deploying a Cisco 7200 series router. I've used ISRs in the past many
> times, but have never touched any 7200 series (or non-ISR for that matter)
> hardware.
>
> Can anyone explain to me the purpose of the 12.2 images I see on CCO for
> this device? These images seem to have a different naming and numbering
> scheme than that 12.4/15 images. Normally, if this was any ISR I would just
> use 12.4T15(latest) as these seem to be the best combination of stability
> and necessary features, but I can't find any clear documentation on what the
> 12.2s are for.
>
> Thanks!
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

gert at greenie

Mar 8, 2010, 10:45 AM

Post #3 of 8 (907 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:32:54AM -0600, P C wrote:
> I'm deploying a Cisco 7200 series router. I've used ISRs in the past many
> times, but have never touched any 7200 series (or non-ISR for that matter)
> hardware.
>
> Can anyone explain to me the purpose of the 12.2 images I see on CCO for
> this device?

Warning: rant ahead. If you don't want that, jump to the end...

<rant>
Mostly "give geeks that want to experiment more options how to shoot
themselves".

Originally, 12.2S was targeted at service providers, and contained stuff
not in 12.2-main (MPLS, for example).

Then came 12.2SB, which was targeted at "broadband deployment", and if I
remember right, contained scalability enhancements for L2TP and other
broadband aggregation technologies.

12.2S is dead, dunno about 12.2SB.

Nowadays, there is 12.2SR*, which is there to hurt users of Cisco 7600 and
7200 platforms at the same time, but in different ways.

Let me explain that. On the 7600, there is *only* 12.2SR* IOS, no
12.3/12.4/15.0 IOS, as the hardware is different from the "general purpose"
platforms, and the IOS development inside some Cisco business units does
not understand that having a single IOS train across the board, with
similar features in all hardware-independent bits of IOS, is something
customers consider useful.

Customers complained, so they got 12.2SR* for the 7200 series as well - but
this is even more special IOS train, and all reports *I* have heard about
SR IOS on 7200 is "it does not work the way we want it to".
</rant>

So. If you want my advice:

- on the platforms where you are limited, use whatever IOS is available

- on the platforms where you have a choice, go to the feature navigator
(http://www.cisco.com/go/fn) and find an IOS version that has all the
features that you want, and has *no letters* attached, and has a high
number in (brackets).

- the "letters thing" is as follows: there is a 12.4 IOS train, that
will only get bugfixes, so 12.4(20) is reasonably sane

- "T" IOS gets new features all the time, so even a 12.4(20)T might
be horribly broken. 12.4(20)T is not really related to 12.4(20), except
that both are descendents of 12.4(1) - one got new bugs, the other got
the bugfixes.

- "other letters" (12.4XJ etc.) are even more broken.

--> depending on your needs, go to 12.3(latest) or 12.4(latest). Only if
you need some features from T, go to 12.4(something)T(high) - or try
15.0.

gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert [at] greenie
fax: +49-89-35655025 gert [at] net

achatz at forthnet

Mar 8, 2010, 11:56 AM

Post #4 of 8 (897 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

A year ago i had seen a note about 15.0S coming out for 7600 at the end
of 2010.

--
Tassos

Gert Doering wrote on 08/03/2010 20:45:
> Let me explain that. On the 7600, there is *only* 12.2SR* IOS, no
> 12.3/12.4/15.0 IOS, as the hardware is different from the "general purpose"
> platforms, and the IOS development inside some Cisco business units does
> not understand that having a single IOS train across the board, with
> similar features in all hardware-independent bits of IOS, is something
> customers consider useful.
>
>

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

lowen at pari

Mar 8, 2010, 12:43 PM

Post #5 of 8 (899 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

On Mar 8, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Gert Doering wrote:

>
> - on the platforms where you have a choice, go to the feature
> navigator
> (http://www.cisco.com/go/fn) and find an IOS version that has all
> the
> features that you want, and has *no letters* attached, and has a
> high
> number in (brackets).

Feature Navigator is unfortunately badly broken. To see how broken,
compare features for a 6500 Sup2/MSFC2 IOS 12.2(18)SXF16 with a 7600
Sup2/MSFC2 IOS 12.2(18)SXF16 with the same feature sets (advanced IP
services, for instance) (yes, identical versions, identical images).
The results may shock you.

This is not the only comparison that is broken; try comparing 12.4
(18c) with 12.4(23) on 7400. I trust Feature Navigator about as far
as I can throw a 12012 GSR.

Also compare the 12.2(33)SRC on the 7200 with the same thing on 7600.
Or try 12.4(21a) on 7500 with the same thing on just about anything
else.

I wish Feature Navigator worked as advertised, I really do, as it
would be a great tool in that case.

But Gert's advice is wise indeed on those platforms where you have a
choice and don't need 'S' train features.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

gert at greenie

Mar 8, 2010, 1:34 PM

Post #6 of 8 (905 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:56:06PM +0200, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
> A year ago i had seen a note about 15.0S coming out for 7600 at the end
> of 2010.

Who wants to enter a bet regarding hardware support?

My $5 go to "15.0S will be a requirement if you want to use the RSP-2T,
but will not support any non-DFC-equipped interface cards, and will
*definitely* not support FWSM, ACE or any other special-case blade".

gert

--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert [at] greenie
fax: +49-89-35655025 gert [at] net

gert at greenie

Mar 8, 2010, 1:44 PM

Post #7 of 8 (902 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 03:43:57PM -0500, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Mar 8, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> >- on the platforms where you have a choice, go to the feature
> >navigator
> > (http://www.cisco.com/go/fn) and find an IOS version that has all
[..]
>
> Feature Navigator is unfortunately badly broken. To see how broken,
> compare features for a 6500 Sup2/MSFC2 IOS 12.2(18)SXF16 with a 7600
> Sup2/MSFC2 IOS 12.2(18)SXF16 with the same feature sets (advanced IP
> services, for instance) (yes, identical versions, identical images).
> The results may shock you.

Yes, for the "stupid BU" IOS images, it is quite broken - and no, it
doesn't shock me. This is just a side effect of bad decisions (as in
"the status of my business unit inside Cisco is much more important
than my customers") regarding these IOS versions in the very beginning.

For mainstream platforms (7200, not NPE-G2) with mainstream IOS versions
(few letters), I have found it to be quite useful.

[..]
> Also compare the 12.2(33)SRC on the 7200 with the same thing on 7600.

Well, that doesn't surprise me very much - see <rant> :-)

The other examples you've given (7500, 7400) are mostly dead platforms,
and I can accept some lack of exact feature descriptions for dead
platforms...

gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert [at] greenie
fax: +49-89-35655025 gert [at] net

lowen at pari

Mar 8, 2010, 3:02 PM

Post #8 of 8 (910 views)
Permalink

Re: Cisco 7201 -- Differences between the 12."2" images and the usual 12.4/15 images? [In reply to]

On Mar 8, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Gert Doering wrote:

> For mainstream platforms (7200, not NPE-G2) with mainstream IOS
> versions
> (few letters), I have found it to be quite useful.

Oh, I certainly find it to be useful. But compare 12.4(18c) (which is
what TAC sent me last year for a IOS security fix) and 12.4(25c) on a
3845, which is pretty recent hardware. It shows that 12.4(25c)
supports OSPF (among the total of 817 features) but that 12.4(18c)
does not. In fact, FN lists 805 features (out of the 817 total) that
12.4(25c) supports but 12.4(18c) does not, listing only 12 features in
common.

Oh, and 12.4(18c) actually does support OSPF, among those 805 features
that FN says it does not support.

The 12 features in common?
AppleTalk Access List Enhancements
ATM Mode for Two-Wire SHDSL
IP SLAs - Application Performance Monitor (APM)
IP SLAs - DLSW+ Operation
IP SLAs - Frame Relay Interfaces
IP SLAs - Reaction Threshold
IP SLAs - Scheduler
IP SLAs - SNA LU2 Echo
IP SLAs - TCP Connect Operation
IP SLAs - UDP Echo Operation
IP SLAs Responder
Link Aggregation Control Protocol (LACP) (802.3ad) for Gigabit
Interfaces
TCP MSS Adjust

I'll not post the whole 805-line list of 12.4(25c) unique features
(per FN), but suffice to say it includes basic stuff like:
Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)
CDP (Cisco Discovery Protocol) Version 2
CEF/dCEF - Cisco Express Forwarding
Classless InterDomain Routing (CIDR) IP Default Gateway
Enhanced IGRP (EIGRP)
Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)
IEEE 802.1Q VLAN Support
IEEE 802.1Q VLAN Trunking
IP Routing
PPP
RADIUS
SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol)
Transparent Bridging

to mention just a few. Which makes it difficult to determine what the
real differences between these two images (which should be minimal;
when comparing 12.4(23) with the same 12.4(25c), only two features are
listed as unique to 12.4(25c): Class-Based Packet Marking
Enhancements, and Security and QoS features:(802.X and ToS for QoS ).
But comparing 12.4(18) with 12.4(18e) is even worse, listing only one
feature (TCP MSS Adjust) in common, and with 12.4(18) having more
features (by a large number) than 12.4(18e). Perhaps it's related to
the lettered rebuilds, I don't know. I haven't yet found any non-
lettered 12.4(x) in spot-checking that shows that kind of difference.
It's not limited to 3845; for 7200, the diff between 12.4(18c) and 12.4
(25c) (IP/FW/IDS IPSEC 3DES) is similar.

I'd really like it to be as useful as it could be, but at the moment
it is less useful than it could be. Perhaps by only using to compare
unlettered mainline releases..... but even then, I've seen odd stuff
in really old releases.

And in my own use, since I have old hardware that takes S train (12000
GRP, 7500) or E train (8500 (I know, I know, but you don't look a gift
switch in the packet processors!)), it can be pretty frustrating.

But FN isn't at this time apparently one of Cisco's flagship
resources; you have to dig to find it on the www.cisco.com website.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads