On Backup and Restore the options for Export to Mirror result in an error that "The Mirror.config does not exist". There also appears to be no documentation on what this does. I assume this is an option to have 2 RV0xx's and to have one mirror the config of the other, but I'm not seeing how one would setup that option.
The startup config file is automatically copied to the mirror config file every 24 hours if there is no reboot of config change in the last 24 hours. When the admin regrets certain config change made to RV0xx V3, he/she can copy the mirror config file to the startup config file, thus restoring the last good configuration. On the current shipping RV0xx products, there is only startup config file being stored on the flash memory, i.e. no mirror config.
Since we have zero mirror documenation I'm going blind here (it'd be nice for you guys to post a FAQ about mirroring in the documents section), but you're saying after we make major changes, have confirmed and tested the changes and need to commit those to a mirror to ensure a seemless transition to the mirror if needed we have to wait 24 hours? It should not be Cisco's decision how long this wait is. If an admin is positive they should be allowed to do it. Also, given the size of the config is very small, why not save more than one config on the mirror and let us rollback several versions of necessary?
The mirror config is to help the admin to recover from an unexpected scenario where the admin regrets the configuration changes he/she made earlier, thus a choice of 24 hours of stable operation. If the admin has reached a satisfactory configuration, he/she is supposed to export/backup the config as a best practice.
I'm gathering here, again without any documentation, that the "mirror" is actually just an undo level on the device not a real mirror to another device. If that's the case "mirror" is a poor choice of words. Fallback would be a better choice. Everyone here was thrilled with the "prospect" of having 2 RV0xx in the rack and if one failed the mirror would take over, but unless I've misunderstood the posts here that's not the case. Cisco will need to be VERY careful how it markets this feature or you will have disappointed customers.