RE: (ASCEND) Q: Status of OSPF in 5.0Ap36

To: "Kevin A. Smith" <kevin@ascend.com>
Subject: RE: (ASCEND) Q: Status of OSPF in 5.0Ap36
From: Jason Nealis <nealis@babylon.erols.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 23:32:40 -0500 (EST)
cc: ascend-users@bungi.com
In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980126170316.009b1d30@mktg_srv.ascend.com>
Sender: owner-ascend-users@max.bungi.com

> >
> > Building a case for it? Bwhahaha! It's common sense, Although it has
> >gotten better, I still cringe every time I have to reboot Maxen's, From
> >modem packs, Net-T1's disappearing etc.. The boxes are just happier
> >without rebooting them.
> 
> "Building a case" is required when you're competing for engineering resources
> against revenue generating new features. We use this to prioritize tasks.

 Well, without items such as the above and the focus on stability, Your
stock price/deployed base will continue to shrink, Yes I agree that Ascend
is usually the first to deploy a new technology, The sad item is that it
take 42 patch releases later to make it stable.

Jason Nealis
Director Internet Operations
Network Access
Erols Internet



> 
> 
> Kevin
> 
> 

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

References:

RE: (ASCEND) Q: Status of OSPF in 5.0Ap36

From: "Kevin A. Smith" <kevin@ascend.com>

Prev by Date: Re: (ASCEND) Quiescenting PRIs
Next by Date: (ASCEND) Q. Is there an inherent restriction for P75 not able to use static IP for NAT?
Prev by thread: RE: (ASCEND) Q: Status of OSPF in 5.0Ap36
Next by thread: Re: (ASCEND) Q: Status of OSPF in 5.0Ap36
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread