Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: nsp: extreme

Extremeware images

 

 

nsp extreme RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


aaron at wholesaleinternet

Jun 5, 2007, 3:05 PM

Post #1 of 5 (1885 views)
Permalink
Extremeware images

Does anyone know what EN's current policy regarding old versions of
Extremeware is? They used to make older revisions (2 or 3 versions back)
publically available via FTP. Once their user's group initiative kind of
fizzled they no longer did this.

Does anyone know if they would allow groups like this list to maintain an
archive for public use of old Extremeware versions and better yet,
contribute to it themselves?

The only argument that anyone has ever been able to get me on with regards
to choosing cisco over extreme is the availability of support and updates.
Resurrecting a repository of older EW versions would go a long way toward
bridging that gap.

Aaron


asr at latency

Jun 19, 2007, 3:26 PM

Post #2 of 5 (1753 views)
Permalink
Extremeware images [In reply to]

On 2007-06-20-18:32:12, Jo Rhett <jrhett at svcolo.com> wrote:
> "Availability of support" in particular competent support is exactly
> why you shouldn't continue bothering with Extreme. Cisco has a lot
> of incompetent support, but competent support does exist and can be
> found in their organizations.

Indeed, Extreme doesn't have the support structure of a larger vendor
such as Cisco, though I'm not entirely convinced this is a Bad Thing.

I've found the Extreme TAC surprisingly nimble, and pleasant to deal
with, on the occasions I've had to contact them. Reporting software
issues and obtaining custom incremental/engineering builds was merely
a matter of the support tech shouting over to his cube-mate. :-)

> We have more than a dozen crucial BGP-announcement-affecting bugs
> that Extreme doesn't have the vaguest clue how to solve, including
> the inability to prevent re-announcement of a default route even with
> an explicit filter denying it. No self-respecting NSP should bother
> with the wallowing shell of a company that Extreme is today.

I'd agree that using Extreme devices for L3 is a poor design design,
and one which needs to be quickly remedied. Some of their newer
products are, however, totally workable in a strict L2 role; case in
point, the X450. Don't throw out the proverbial baby with the bath
water!

-a


lebayle at esrf

Jun 19, 2007, 10:51 PM

Post #3 of 5 (1803 views)
Permalink
Extremeware images [In reply to]

Adam Rothschild wrote:
> On 2007-06-20-18:32:12, Jo Rhett <jrhett at svcolo.com> wrote:
>> "Availability of support" in particular competent support is exactly
>> why you shouldn't continue bothering with Extreme. Cisco has a lot
>> of incompetent support, but competent support does exist and can be
>> found in their organizations.

As a former Cisco customer - ah, the nightmare of Catalysts 5500s with
SPT and HSRP, where we suffered many times full network failures where
the only hope is to disconnect fiber ports until the load goes down, the
exotic and frenetic CatOS plus IOS versioning - I fully agree that no
customer support is of an acceptable quality nowadays, whatever the
manufacturer - we have a Juniper experience, too. And this is not
Netherlands-bashing ;-)
The only way to have good support is 1) to build the competence
internally if possible - training is welcome - and 2) find someone
really smart and reliable in a supplier's enterprise.

> Indeed, Extreme doesn't have the support structure of a larger vendor
> such as Cisco, though I'm not entirely convinced this is a Bad Thing.
>
> I've found the Extreme TAC surprisingly nimble, and pleasant to deal
> with, on the occasions I've had to contact them. Reporting software
> issues and obtaining custom incremental/engineering builds was merely
> a matter of the support tech shouting over to his cube-mate. :-)
>
>> We have more than a dozen crucial BGP-announcement-affecting bugs
>> that Extreme doesn't have the vaguest clue how to solve, including
>> the inability to prevent re-announcement of a default route even with
>> an explicit filter denying it. No self-respecting NSP should bother
>> with the wallowing shell of a company that Extreme is today.
>
> I'd agree that using Extreme devices for L3 is a poor design design,
> and one which needs to be quickly remedied. Some of their newer

Strange to say this ! Especially on an Extreme mailing list ... Well,
our network fully relies on ExtremeWareXOS at L3 including BGP for our
connection to the local MAN, and we are very happy with this. We are
using ACLs, Clear-Flow, VRRP, RIP and did not face any problem when
deploying.

Cheers,
Bruno.
_____________________________________________________________________
o
o o o Bruno LEBAYLE - Computing Infrastructure group
o o o o o E.S.R.F (European Synchrotron Radiation Facility)
o ooo o 6 rue Jules Horowitz BP220 38043 GRENOBLE CEDEX 9
o o o ooooo o o o phone (33)4-7688-2258
o ooo o fax (33)4-7688-2020
o o o o o email lebayle at esrf.fr
o o o
o http://intranet.esrf.fr/Computing/ComputingInfrastructure
_____________________________________________________________________


jrhett at svcolo

Jun 20, 2007, 11:33 AM

Post #4 of 5 (1768 views)
Permalink
Extremeware images [In reply to]

On Jun 19, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bruno Lebayle wrote:
> Strange to say this ! Especially on an Extreme mailing list ...
> Well, our network fully relies on ExtremeWareXOS at L3 including
> BGP for our connection to the local MAN, and we are very happy with
> this. We are using ACLs, Clear-Flow, VRRP, RIP and did not face any
> problem when deploying.

Perhaps XOS is better. But given Extreme's many and multifold
problems with supporting their products, we couldn't justify taking
that risk. We went with Force10 instead.

--
Jo Rhett
senior geek

Silicon Valley Colocation
Support Phone: 408-400-0550


jrhett at svcolo

Jun 20, 2007, 2:32 PM

Post #5 of 5 (1752 views)
Permalink
Extremeware images [In reply to]

On Jun 5, 2007, at 4:05 PM, Aaron Wendel wrote:
> The only argument that anyone has ever been able to get me on with
> regards
> to choosing cisco over extreme is the availability of support and
> updates.

"Availability of support" in particular competent support is exactly
why you shouldn't continue bothering with Extreme. Cisco has a lot
of incompetent support, but competent support does exist and can be
found in their organizations.

We have more than a dozen crucial BGP-announcement-affecting bugs
that Extreme doesn't have the vaguest clue how to solve, including
the inability to prevent re-announcement of a default route even with
an explicit filter denying it. No self-respecting NSP should bother
with the wallowing shell of a company that Extreme is today.

--
Jo Rhett
senior geek

Silicon Valley Colocation
Support Phone: 408-400-0550

nsp extreme RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.