Amsterdan VS Gibraltar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-25-2022 09:32 AM
Hello
I am looking to update my IOS XE 9300/9200 switches, currently running 16.12.5 - I see Amsterdam train (17.3.4a) and wanted to know if this would be good choice with respect to staiblity, performance issues, vulnerabilities etc
We are looking at Cisco DNA centre but nothing like SD WAN functionality we need
Please advise
Thanks,
- Labels:
-
LAN Switching
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-25-2022 09:40 AM
17.3.4 is good to go for DNAC environment as SD-Access deployment.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-25-2022 10:33 AM
vulnerbilities
So without this feature is 17.x train best way to go?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-25-2022 11:00 AM
17.3.3 i am running and stable so far.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-25-2022 03:34 PM
One is buggy and the other is stable.
For 9300, use 17.3.X.
For 9200, use 16.12.X.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-26-2022 01:21 AM
Thank you both,
what are the new features that are in 17.x that are not in 16.x . if I use 17.x.x, is it memory intensive on 9200/9300? is that why @leo lahoo advising to use 16.12. on 9200's?
I was mainly concerned that 17.x is for SD WAN which we dont use and I know there are vulnerabilities relating to SD WAN a lot
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-26-2022 01:59 AM
@NetworkGuy! wrote:
what are the new features that are in 17.x that are not in 16.x .
Read the Release Notes.
@NetworkGuy! wrote:
if I use 17.x.x, is it memory intensive on 9200/9300
I cannot answer that question because I do not know what features, settings and configuration is enabled on the network.
@NetworkGuy! wrote:
is that why @leo lahoo advising to use 16.12. on 9200's?
Read the Release Notes. Look at the Open Caveats section. For the 9200, it is better to use 16.12.X than 17.3.X.
For the 9300, it is better to use 17.3.X.
@NetworkGuy! wrote:
I know there are vulnerabilities relating to SD WAN a lot
You "know" or you "read"? If someone has taken the time to thoroughly read the Release Notes, it will lead to the Security Bulletin. The Security Bulletin will have detailed information about what versions are affected, workarounds and fixed versions. If no one bothers to read the Release Notes and Security Bulletin, then ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-26-2022 03:44 AM
checking, for ISR 4400 what would you recommend?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-26-2022 04:23 AM
@NetworkGuy! wrote:
for ISR 4400 what would you recommend?
Without knowing about the network involved, I would say 16.6.X.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
08-17-2022 12:57 AM
Leo, as of Aug 2022, what is a well regarded IOS for ISR4400? Assume simple routing with eigrp, bgp, and some QoS. No SDWAN or SDLAN.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
08-17-2022 03:58 AM - edited 08-17-2022 04:11 AM
@jmcgrady1, avoid using a train that supports Cisco Smart License.
For switches, CSL support starts at 16.9.X. For routers, CSL support starts at 16.10.X.
Have a read: IOS-XE leaks like a sieve
