nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cisco HFR
From: Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 11:19:56 +0300
Tony Li wrote:
I thought the main reason for "in service upgrades" was to allow daily updates to the code instead of the now popular bi-weekly ones. :-)I've heard the rumor that that would be the first port that they would undertake, and that would make some sense. However, I hope that they focus their efforts on stabilizing first and porting second. No point in porting what isn't stable.
Pete
Current thread:
- Re: Cisco HFR, (continued)
- Re: Cisco HFR Jared Mauch (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Adrian Chadd (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Alexei Roudnev (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Robert E. Seastrom (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Kurt Erik Lindqvist (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Tony Li (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Deepak Jain (May 27)
- RE: Cisco HFR Neil J. McRae (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Kevin Oberman (May 25)
- Re: Cisco HFR Mans Nilsson (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Warren Kumari (May 26)